Walker v. Dorn

STONE, J.

This action arose from a landlord-tenant relationship that began with a written lease in 1952, followed by written renewal leases until June 1, 1958. Plaintiffs-lessors signed and mailed to defendant copies of a written lease covering the period June 1, 1958, through December 31, 1961. At the trial defendant produced two copies of the lease signed by plaintiffs but unsigned by him, and asserted he held possession under an oral lease that varied some of the terms of the written lease. Plaintiff Kenneth Walker testified that defendant returned a signed copy of the lease which he was unable to produce because he discarded it after it expired December 31, 1961.

[119]

The trial court ruled that defendant was bound by the terms of the written lease except as to subsequent executed oral modifications.

The principal question on appeal is whether the trial court erred in thus taking from the jury the determination whether defendant held the premises under the terms of the written lease, unsigned by him, or under an oral lease.

The first difficulty defendant faced during trial arose from his pleadings. Plaintiffs pleaded the written lease and alleged defendant wrongfully withheld possession of the premises after the lease terminated. Defendant, by verified answer, denied signing the lease, and affirmatively alleged an oral lease between the parties covering the period June 1, 1958, through December 31, 1961, and a subsequent oral lease for the holdover year 1962. However, defendant also pleaded contradictory allegations

that

admitted the written lease. In answer to plaintiffs’ first cause of action, defendant affirmatively alleged: “. . . in addition to his oral lease rights above referred to, he was a tenant of plaintiffs concerning agricultural lands who held over and retained possession of the land described in plaintiffs’ amended complaint

after the termination of the lease referred to in plaintiffs amended complaint ending on December 31, 1961,

for a period of more than 60 days after the expiration of the term without demand for possession or notice to quit by plaintiffs being served upon him, . . .” (Italics added.)