City v. Fitzgerald

Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati

City v. Fitzgerald

2 Cin. Sup. Ct. Rep. 61

DecidedMay 15, 1870

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Cin. Sup. Ct. Rep. 61 (City v. Fitzgerald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City v. Fitzgerald, 2 Cin. Sup. Ct. Rep. 61 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1870).

Pincite

Opinion

Storer, J.

Action to recover rent due under a lease. The defendant demurred on the ground that there was no averment in the petition of a demand having been made. It appeared the parties-covenanted that an entry might be [62]*62had for non-payment of rent without demand being first made.

In Garratt v. Sweeney, 2 Disney, 601, we held, in General Term, that such a stipulation proved the necessity of a demand, on the authority of Lord Coke, in Dormer’s Case, 3 Co. 41.

Demurrer overruled.

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

Storer, J.

Action to recover rent due under a lease. The defendant demurred on the ground that there was no averment in the petition of a demand having been made. It appeared the parties-covenanted that an entry might be [62]*62had for non-payment of rent without demand being first made.

In Garratt v. Sweeney, 2 Disney, 601, we held, in General Term, that such a stipulation proved the necessity of a demand, on the authority of Lord Coke, in Dormer’s Case, 3 Co. 41.

Demurrer overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Cin. Sup. Ct. Rep. 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-v-fitzgerald-ohsuperctcinci-1870.