TRY ME!
Leasehold Estate Clarifications
Summary
Terrys continued occupancy and rent payment after lease expiration likely creates a periodic tenancy. Tanyas lease is a term of years determinable, ending upon her graduation. Under the English rule, Lana must evict Tim for Neds possession. In a commercial lease, the original landlord can hold the first and second tenants liable under common law, but not the third tenant.Full Conversation
*. Luis owned a residential condominium unit near a medical school. Tanya, a new medical student, inspected the unit and decided to rent it. Luis and Tanya entered into a written lease which provided, among other things: “Luis hereby leases the said property to Tanya for five years, but this lease will end if she graduates from medical school before that time.” The lease obligates Tanya to pay $* in per month in rent. What estate does Tanya have?
o Tenancy at will.
o Term of years determinable.
o Term of years subject to a condition subsequent.
o Term of years subject to an executory limitation.
Based on the provided lease terms, Tanya has a "Term of years determinable" estate.
- The lease is for a fixed term (five years) but it will end automatically if Tanya graduates from medical school before that time.
- This makes the lease determinable upon a specified event.
- The lease is for a fixed term (five years) but it will end automatically if Tanya graduates from medical school before that time.
- This makes the lease determinable upon a specified event.
*. Lana owned a large warehouse, which she leased to Tim for five years beginning on January *. One month before the expiration of Tim’s lease, Lana entered into a lease with Ned, whereby Ned leased the premises for a three-year term beginning on January *. When Ned arrived at the warehouse on January *, however, he discovered that Tim was still occupying the premises, even though Tim had no legal right to do so. Which of the following is correct?
o Lana is liable to Ned for damages if the jurisdiction follows the American rule.
o Ned may evict Tim if the jurisdiction follows the American rule.
o Lana is now obligated to evict Tim if the jurisdiction follows the English rule.
o Ned’s lease is terminated if the jurisdiction follows the English rule.
Based on the given scenario:
- Lana is now obligated to evict Tim if the jurisdiction follows the English rule.
- Lana is now obligated to evict Tim if the jurisdiction follows the English rule.
Explanation:
- American Rule: The landlord is only required to provide the right to possession, not actual possession. Thus, Lana would not be liable for damages, and Ned would need to evict Tim.
- English Rule: The landlord must ensure the tenant can take actual possession. Thus, Lana must evict Tim to fulfill her obligation to Ned.
Do you need any further clarification on this matter?
- American Rule: The landlord is only required to provide the right to possession, not actual possession. Thus, Lana would not be liable for damages, and Ned would need to evict Tim.
- English Rule: The landlord must ensure the tenant can take actual possession. Thus, Lana must evict Tim to fulfill her obligation to Ned.
Do you need any further clarification on this matter?
*. A tenant of a commercial property has a lease with 10 years remaining. This tenant then "assigns, transfers, and subleases" all 10 years of their leasehold interest to a second tenant. The second tenant, after using the property for 1 year, "assigns, subleases, and transfers" * of the remaining 9 years on the lease to a third tenant. The third tenant then violates a term in the lease providing that the tenant will "maintain the grounds of the property in good condition". Who may the original landlord hold liable under a traditional common law system?
o The first tenant only.
o The first and second tenant but not the third.
o The third tenant only
o The second and third tenant only but not the first.
o The second tenant only.
Case Rating: *
Under traditional common law, the original landlord may hold the first tenant only liable. Here's why:
- When the first tenant assigns the lease to the second tenant, the first tenant remains liable to the landlord under the original lease terms, unless released by the landlord.
- The second tenant's assignment to the third tenant does not relieve the first tenant of their original obligations.
Do you have any other questions related to this issue?
Under traditional common law, the original landlord may hold the first tenant only liable. Here's why:
- When the first tenant assigns the lease to the second tenant, the first tenant remains liable to the landlord under the original lease terms, unless released by the landlord.
- The second tenant's assignment to the third tenant does not relieve the first tenant of their original obligations.
Do you have any other questions related to this issue?
*. A tenant of a commercial property has a lease with 10 years remaining. This tenant then "assigns, transfers, and subleases" all 10 years of their leasehold interest to a second tenant. The second tenant, after using the property for 1 year, "assigns, subleases, and transfers" * of the remaining 9 years on the lease to a third tenant. The third tenant then violates a term in the lease providing that the tenant will "maintain the grounds of the property in good condition". Who may the original landlord hold liable under a traditional common law system?
o The first tenant only.
o The first and second tenant but not the third.
o The third tenant only
o The second and third tenant only but not the first.
o The second tenant only.
Case Rating: *
Under traditional common law, the original landlord may hold the first and second tenant but not the third liable. This is because:
- The first tenant remains liable under the original lease unless explicitly released by the landlord.
- The second tenant, having transferred the lease to the third tenant, is also liable under the original lease terms unless released by the landlord.
- The third tenant is liable to the second tenant, not directly to the landlord.
Do you need further clarification or have any more questions regarding this issue?
Under traditional common law, the original landlord may hold the first and second tenant but not the third liable. This is because:
- The first tenant remains liable under the original lease unless explicitly released by the landlord.
- The second tenant, having transferred the lease to the third tenant, is also liable under the original lease terms unless released by the landlord.
- The third tenant is liable to the second tenant, not directly to the landlord.
Do you need further clarification or have any more questions regarding this issue?
Start a new chat