Breuer v. Berold

Hamilton Circuit Court

Breuer v. Berold

19 Ohio C.C. Dec. 502, 9 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 350, 1907 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 212

DecidedFebruary 2, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 19 Ohio C.C. Dec. 502 (Breuer v. Berold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hamilton Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Breuer v. Berold, 19 Ohio C.C. Dec. 502, 9 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 350, 1907 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 212 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The canse of action as stated in the amended petition is founded upon a verbal contract of lease of certain real estate for a term of one year at a monthly rental of $100, and upon part performance by delivery of possession and by acts of the tenant in setting up certain machinery in the building according to the terms of the contract.' The breach of the contract consisted in the refusal of the landlord to allow other machinery to be moved into the premises or the operation of any of such machinery, whereby the tenant was compelled to and did.abandon the premises. The relief prayed for is damages for the alleged breach of the contract.

The lease was within the statute of frauds, and could not be enforced, unless by part performance it was taken out of the operation of that statute. Grant v. Ramsey, 7 Ohio St. 157, 158, 167.

The only relief to which the tenant was entitled, under the allegations of the amended petition, or in any event after abandonment of tfye premises, was a personal judgment for money only. His right of action depended upon part performance of the contract, the doctrine of which obtains in equity only, and does not avail to fender a contract, which is void by the statute because unwritten or unsigned, capable of Being sued on in a court of law. Kling v. Bordner, 65 Ohio St. 86 [61 N. E. Rep. 148].

The court therefore erred in overruling the demurrer to the amended petition, and in overruling the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Judgment of the court of common pleas reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

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

PER CURIAM.

The canse of action as stated in the amended petition is founded upon a verbal contract of lease of certain real estate for a term of one year at a monthly rental of $100, and upon part performance by delivery of possession and by acts of the tenant in setting up certain machinery in the building according to the terms of the contract.' The breach of the contract consisted in the refusal of the landlord to allow other machinery to be moved into the premises or the operation of any of such machinery, whereby the tenant was compelled to and did.abandon the premises. The relief prayed for is damages for the alleged breach of the contract.

The lease was within the statute of frauds, and could not be enforced, unless by part performance it was taken out of the operation of that statute. Grant v. Ramsey, 7 Ohio St. 157, 158, 167.

The only relief to which the tenant was entitled, under the allegations of the amended petition, or in any event after abandonment of tfye premises, was a personal judgment for money only. His right of action depended upon part performance of the contract, the doctrine of which obtains in equity only, and does not avail to fender a contract, which is void by the statute because unwritten or unsigned, capable of Being sued on in a court of law. Kling v. Bordner, 65 Ohio St. 86 [61 N. E. Rep. 148].

The court therefore erred in overruling the demurrer to the amended petition, and in overruling the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Judgment of the court of common pleas reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 Ohio C.C. Dec. 502, 9 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 350, 1907 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/breuer-v-berold-ohcircthamilton-1907.