Zeigler v. Lichten
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Zeigler v. Lichten, 205 Pa. 104 (Pa. 1903)
54 A. 489; 1903 Pa. LEXIS 523
Brown, Dean, Fell, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Potter
Zeigler v. Lichten
Opinion of the Court
Judgment was entered by warrant of attorney in a lease for breach of the covenant not to sublet. The breach was not denied but appellant set up a contemporaneous parol agreement that he might sublet, and facts that carried notice to the lessor that a subletting was contemplated. The burden of proof was on appellant and the court below found that there was no sufficient evidence to prove the alleged agreement, even if it could be shown without preliminary proof of fraud, accident or mistake. There is nothing in the case but a question of the sufficiency of evidence.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Landlord and tenant — Covenant against subletting — Parol agreement— Evidence — Opening judgment— Question of fact. On a rule to open a judgment entered by warrant, of attorney in a lease for breach of a covenant not to sublet, where the lessee sets up an alleged contemporaneous parol agreement that he might sublet, the burden of proof is on the lessee, and a finding of the court below that' there was no sufficient evidence of such alleged agreement will not be reversed by the appellate court, there being nothinginthe case but a question of the sufficiency of evidence.