Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

ROUTMAN v. BOHM ET UX. (03/22/61)

March 22, 1961

ROUTMAN
v.
BOHM ET UX., APPELLANTS.



Appeal, No. 231, April T., 1960, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Mercer County, March T., 1960, No. 120, in case of Samuel Routman et al. v. Samuel Bohm and Sarah Bohm, trading as Rembrandt Camera and Hobby Shop. Judgment affirmed.

COUNSEL

Philip E. Brockway, with him Brockway and Brockway, for appellants.

Nathan Routman, with him Routman. Moore & Goldstone, for appellees.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, Watkins, and Montgomery, JJ.

Author: Woodside

[ 194 Pa. Super. Page 414]

OPINION BY WOODSIDE, J.

This is an appeal from the entry of judgment on the pleadings in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants for $900 in an assumpsit action to recover rent.

Samuel, Jennie and Louis Routman, plaintiffs herein, leased a storeroom in Sharon to Samuel and Sarah Bohm, defendants herein, for a term of three years commencing April 1, 1956, for a total rental of $16,200, payable in equal monthly installments of $450 on the first day of each month during the term.

The lease was in writing and contained the following provisions: "The lessees hereby waive the usual three months notice to quit and agree to surrender said premises at the expiration of said term, or the termination of this lease without any notice whatsoever." There was no provision in the lease relating to renewal or holding over by the tenant.

The Bohms went into possession and occupied the premises during the term of the lease and paid the required rental. After the expiration of the term on March 31, 1959, they continued to occupy the premises during the months of March through December 1959, inclusive. They paid the monthly installments of rent in the amount provided in the written lease. These payments were accepted by the landlords. On November 28, 1959, the tenants notified the landlords that they intended to vacate the premises on the last of December, which they did.

When the Bohms failed to pay rent on January 1 and February 1, 1960, the Routmans brought this action

[ 194 Pa. Super. Page 415]

    to recover the monthly installments of rent which they alleged ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.