Harnish v. Kauffman

Citations

• 78 Pa. Super. 251
• 1922 Pa. Super. LEXIS 97

Syllabus

<p>Landlord and tenant — Lease—Subletting—Consent—Evidence— Sufficiency.</p> <p>Where premises have been leased under an express prohibition of subletting without written consent, evidence that those who desired to sublet went to the owner, and, upon requesting his consent, were told “there would be no trouble,” but that he wanted to see his tenant, is not sufficient to establish his consent to a subletting, or a waiver of the restriction.</p> <p>Subtenants, who have been dispossessed, cannot rely upon a lease, and at the same time ignore its provisions. If they claim the protection of favorable clauses, they are bound by the clauses advantageous to the owner, and, if they affirm a waiver of the lease, they cannot avail themselves of its protection.</p>