Playter v. Cunningham

Citations

• 21 Cal. 229

Syllabus

<p>Upon a covenant in a lease for quiet enjoyment the lessor is responsible only for his own acts and those of others claiming by title paramount to the lease and not for the acts of a mere trespasser, although the effect of these acts may be to deprive the lessee of the benefit of the lease.</p> <p>Thus, where a lessor was sued upon a covenant “ that the lessees paying the rent shall peaceably and quietly have, hold, and enjoy the premises for the term mentioned,” and the breach alleged was that the lessee had been prevented from entering by one R. who was in possession, claiming to hold under a prior lease: Held, that the complaint was demurrable in failing to aver any sufficient breach of the covenant.</p> <p>Held, further, that if the complaint had averred that R. was in possession, actually holding under a superior title, it would have been sufficient without alleging that a suit had been brought and the validity of the title judicially determined.</p>