Julian v. Christopher

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[bjecause there is a public policy against restraints on alienation, if a lease is silent on the subject, a tenant may freely sublease or assign.”
• rejecting a “common law interpretation” of reasonableness and recognizing the need for a case-specific analysis of what would constitute reasonableness
• centering its discussion around property law and landlord-tenant con- cepts, rather than general contract principles
• refusing to “rewrite” the contract between the parties because “we should assume” that parties executing contracts when certain laws govern the subject of their contract “were aware of [the law at the time] and the implications drawn from the words they used”
• in every contract, “ ‘there exists an implied covenant that each of the parties thereto will act in good faith,’ ” including times when a party exercises discretion
• “[i]f the lease does not spell out any standard for withholding consent, then the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing should imply a reasonableness standard”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).