Howard v. Scott

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Howard v. Scott

59 S.E.2d 533, 81 Ga. App. 617, 1950 Ga. App. LEXIS 957

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 19, 1950

Docket33053

StatusPublished

This text of 59 S.E.2d 533 (Howard v. Scott) 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

Howard v. Scott, 59 S.E.2d 533, 81 Ga. App. 617, 1950 Ga. App. LEXIS 957 (Ga. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Teuton, J.

If, in a dispossessory proceeding against a tenant at sufferance, the plaintiff prevails, the tenant holding over is liable for double the reasonable rental value of the premises from the date of the demand proved or presumed, and not double the rental stipulated in the contract of lease. Darling Stores Corp. v. William Beatus Inc., 68 Ga. App. 869 (24 S. E. 2d, 805); Code § 61-305. The plaintiff in his dispossessory affidavit alleged that the tenant was holding over after the term, thereby recognizing him as a tenant at sufferance, and he can not complain because the court, in directing a verdict in his favor, failed to award double rent when no reasonable rental value of the premises was proved.

The court did not err in failing to award double rent.

Judgment affirmed.

Sutton, C.J., and Worrill, J., concur.

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

Teuton, J.

If, in a dispossessory proceeding against a tenant at sufferance, the plaintiff prevails, the tenant holding over is liable for double the reasonable rental value of the premises from the date of the demand proved or presumed, and not double the rental stipulated in the contract of lease. Darling Stores Corp. v. William Beatus Inc., 68 Ga. App. 869 (24 S. E. 2d, 805); Code § 61-305. The plaintiff in his dispossessory affidavit alleged that the tenant was holding over after the term, thereby recognizing him as a tenant at sufferance, and he can not complain because the court, in directing a verdict in his favor, failed to award double rent when no reasonable rental value of the premises was proved.

The court did not err in failing to award double rent.

Judgment affirmed.

Sutton, C.J., and Worrill, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 S.E.2d 533, 81 Ga. App. 617, 1950 Ga. App. LEXIS 957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-scott-gactapp-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack