Zeigler v. Lichten

54 A. 489, 205 Pa. 104, 1903 Pa. LEXIS 523
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedFebruary 9, 1903
DocketAppeal, No. 152
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 54 A. 489 (Zeigler v. Lichten) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Zeigler v. Lichten, 54 A. 489, 205 Pa. 104, 1903 Pa. LEXIS 523 (Pa. 1903).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Judgment was entered by warrant of attorney in a lease for breach of the covenant not to sublet. The breach was not denied but appellant set up a contemporaneous parol agreement that he might sublet, and facts that carried notice to the lessor that a subletting was contemplated. The burden of proof was on appellant and the court below found that there was no sufficient evidence to prove the alleged agreement, even if it could be shown without preliminary proof of fraud, accident or mistake. There is nothing in the case but a question of the sufficiency of evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Morrisville Shopping Center, Inc. v. Sun Ray Drug Co.
112 A.2d 183 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 A. 489, 205 Pa. 104, 1903 Pa. LEXIS 523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeigler-v-lichten-pa-1903.