Morgan v. Williams

Citations

• 39 Pa. Super. 580
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 539

Syllabus

<p>Landlord and tenant — Parol lease — Yearly lease — Monthly lease — Conflicting evidence.</p> <p>1. In a proceeding to recover possession of leased premises under the Act of December 14,1863, P. L. (1864) 1125, where thirty days’ notice only was given by the landlord, it is incumbent upon the latter to bring himself within the provisions of the Act of March 31, 1905, P. L. 87, by showing that the lease under which the tenant held was for “ a time less than one year, or by the month, or for an indeterminable time. ”</p> <p>2. In such a case where it appears that there was no written lease, but merely a parol one, and the evidence is contradictory as to whether the tenant entered under an agreement for a yearly lease, or for a monthly lease, the question of the terms of the lease as agreed upon by the parties, is for the jury under the proper instructions of the court.</p> <p>3. In determining whether the tenant entered into an agreement for a yearly lease, the fact that she assented to an increase of rent during the first year is pertinent as tending to sustain the landlord’s contention that the tenant entered and was then holding as a tenant by the month, but it does not in and of itself change the nature of the tenancy.</p> <p>4. A tenancy at will may become a tenancy from year to year if it appears that the tenant without objection by the landlord makes a number of valuable improvements on the premises for business purposes, remains in possession for more than three years, pays the stipulated rent, and when an increase is demanded, pays it, and the landlord accepts it without notice to remove or other action indicating an intention to hold the tenant as strictly a tenant at will.</p>