Brackin v. Desverges

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Brackin v. Desverges

89 S.E. 303, 18 Ga. App. 265, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 274

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 23, 1916

Docket6998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 89 S.E. 303 (Brackin v. Desverges) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brackin v. Desverges, 89 S.E. 303, 18 Ga. App. 265, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 274 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Hodges, J.

The undisputed evidence showed that the defendant rented from the plaintiff certain property at a specified sum per month, for a term of eleven months, ending September 22nd, 1911. The defendant continued to occupy the premises after the end of that term, at an increased rental, until January 1, 1914, at which time he secured another place, but he used a part of the premises for storage purposes until the end of March, 1914. This suit was for the rent from March 22, 1914, to September 22, 1914. Where no time is specified for the termination of tenancy, the law will construe it to be for the calendar year. Civil [266]*266Code, § 3708. Where one tenders the keys to his landlord and they are rejected, but he nevertheless continues to use a part of the premises for storage, he is to be treated as taking the premises and becoming liable for the rent for the term of one year. There was no error in the direction of a verdict for the plaintiff. <Judgment affirmed.

Decided June 23, 1916.

Complaint; from city court of Zebulon — Judge Dupree. September 27, 1915.

W. V. Custer, for plaintiff in error, contended that the tenancy was merely a tenancy at will, and cited:

Civil Code, §§ 3708-9; Weed v. Lindsey, 88 Ga. 686.

Hartsfield & Conger, contra, cited:

Civil Code, § 3708; Cavanaugh v. Clinch, 88 Ga. 610; Roberson & Simons, 109 Ga. 360; Ridgway v. Bryant, 8 Ga. App. 564.

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

Hodges, J.

The undisputed evidence showed that the defendant rented from the plaintiff certain property at a specified sum per month, for a term of eleven months, ending September 22nd, 1911. The defendant continued to occupy the premises after the end of that term, at an increased rental, until January 1, 1914, at which time he secured another place, but he used a part of the premises for storage purposes until the end of March, 1914. This suit was for the rent from March 22, 1914, to September 22, 1914. Where no time is specified for the termination of tenancy, the law will construe it to be for the calendar year. Civil [266]*266Code, § 3708. Where one tenders the keys to his landlord and they are rejected, but he nevertheless continues to use a part of the premises for storage, he is to be treated as taking the premises and becoming liable for the rent for the term of one year. There was no error in the direction of a verdict for the plaintiff. <Judgment affirmed.

Decided June 23, 1916.

Complaint; from city court of Zebulon — Judge Dupree. September 27, 1915.

W. V. Custer, for plaintiff in error, contended that the tenancy was merely a tenancy at will, and cited:

Civil Code, §§ 3708-9; Weed v. Lindsey, 88 Ga. 686.

Hartsfield & Conger, contra, cited:

Civil Code, § 3708; Cavanaugh v. Clinch, 88 Ga. 610; Roberson & Simons, 109 Ga. 360; Ridgway v. Bryant, 8 Ga. App. 564.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 S.E. 303, 18 Ga. App. 265, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brackin-v-desverges-gactapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack