Adams v. Shoopman

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Adams v. Shoopman

316 S.W.2d 840

DecidedOctober 10, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 316 S.W.2d 840 (Adams v. Shoopman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. Shoopman, 316 S.W.2d 840 (Ky. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment of the Casey Circuit Court, Honorable James C. Carter, Jr., Judge, dismissing appellants’ complaint seeking possession of a certain building occupied by appellee under a written lease. Appellants base their right of re-entry on the allegation of nonpayment of rent.

Inasmuch as the lease does not contain a forfeiture clause, the appellee’s failure to pay rent when due does not constitute a ground upon which appellant may be granted relief in this action. 32 Am.Jur., Landlord and Tenant, Section 852, p. 723; 51 C.J.S. Landlord and Tenant § 104(b), p. 683.

The motion for appeal is overruled and the judgment stands affirmed.

MONTGOMERY, J., not sitting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment of the Casey Circuit Court, Honorable James C. Carter, Jr., Judge, dismissing appellants’ complaint seeking possession of a certain building occupied by appellee under a written lease. Appellants base their right of re-entry on the allegation of nonpayment of rent.

Inasmuch as the lease does not contain a forfeiture clause, the appellee’s failure to pay rent when due does not constitute a ground upon which appellant may be granted relief in this action. 32 Am.Jur., Landlord and Tenant, Section 852, p. 723; 51 C.J.S. Landlord and Tenant § 104(b), p. 683.

The motion for appeal is overruled and the judgment stands affirmed.

MONTGOMERY, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

316 S.W.2d 840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-shoopman-kyctapp-1958.