Hardy v. Briggs
Hardy v. Briggs
Opinion of the Court
We are called upon to construe the language of a lease by the terms of which provision is made for the payment of an increased rent in case “ the income for power let, other than that used or let by said lessees in store No. 9,” (the premises leased to the defendants,) amounts to a certain sum. Is this phrase to be construed as meaning gross income or net income ; the whole amount of rent received for power furnished to the other stores in the block, or the net profit arising from power so furnished, after deducting from the sums received the cost of its production ?
In computing the amount to be realized before the increase of rent begins, the power used by the tenants or let to others in No. 9 is expressly excluded. If this store was to be charged
We cannot believe that such was the intended bargain of the parties. The language employed, standing by itself, is consistent with either construction. When applied to the subject matter of the contract and the circumstances under which it was made, we interpret the word income in this instance and connection to mean simply receipts.
The result is, that the plaintiffs are entitled to recover the larger amount of rent, and the exceptions 'are overruled.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.