Palmer v. Ford

Citations

• 70 Ill. 369

Syllabus

<p>1. Fobfeitdbe. Forfeitures are not regarded by courts with any special favor, and where a party insists upon a forfeiture, he must make clear proof, and show he is entitled to it. It is a harsh way of terminating contracts, and he who insists upon making a declaration of a forfeiture, must be held strictly within the limits of the authority which gives the right.</p> <p>2. Where a lease conferred upon a party a clear right to declare a forfeiture for non-payment of rent, if the power of declaring the forfeiture was properly exercised, a bill filed by the lessee against the lessor, seeking relief against such forfeiture, and to enjoin the lessor from .prosecuting suits at lav/ for the recovery of the possession of the leased premises, should not be entertained.</p> <p>3. Same—notice. A lessee of a lot of ground erected a building thereon, under the terms of the lease, for the purpose of renting the same to other tenants. The lessor reserved the right to declare a forfeiture of the lease for default in payment of the ground rent, as it should become due. Several instalments of rent became due, but the lessor, at the instance of the lessee, waived his privilege to declare a forfeiture, and did not press the lessee for payment for more than a year, other than in receiving rents from the tenants of the building, which had been provided for by agreement of the lessee. Moreover, negotiations had been going on for an adjustment of the matter of the ground rent, and the lessor had evinced a disposition to favor the lessee in that regard. It was held, that under these circumstances, notwithstanding the lessee had, by the terms of the lease, expressly waived the right to any notice of an intention on the part of the lessor to declare a forfeiture, yet he should have notice before such declaration could properly be made.</p>