Baird v. Milford Land & Lumber Co.
Before: Paterson
Synopsis
Lease for Lumbering Purposes — Construction—Amount of Rental. — Under a lease for general lumbering purposes, providing that the lessee should cut and remove all the merchantable timber fit for saw-logs, at the rate of at least one million five hundred thousand feet the first year and two million feet every year thereafter, and pay therefor one dollar per thousand feet, the payments to he made in equal quarterly installments each year, provided, however, that if they should not remove the amount of timber specified to he taken in any one year, they should nevertheless pay therefor and remove the same in any subsequent year without further charge or pay, the lease to continue twenty years, with the privilege of renewal at a rent of ten dollars a year in addition to “the stumpage rent hereby reserved,” the lessor is entitled only to the value of the merchantable timber on the land fit for saw-logs at one dollar per thousand, payable in the quarterly payments fixed by the lease until the whole of such timber is paid for, and is not entitled to recover the quarterly payments, as rent or royalty, during the whole time that the lessee is in possession, whether the timber has been removed or not, after the amount of such rental equals the value of all of the merchantable timber fit for saw-logs.
Id.—Renewal — Bad Faith —Negligence.—Under the terms of the contract, if at the end of the first term all the timber shall have been removed from the land, or if not removed, it be made to appear that the failure to remove it was caused by bad faith, negligence, or want of diligence, it seems that the lessees are not given the righ t of renewal for an additional term at a rental of ten dollars per year, whatever may be the meaning of the expression “ stumpage rent hereby reserved.”
Id. — Percentage for Waste.—In an action to recover the rent due under the lease, the refusal of the court to add ten per cent for waste in sawing to the amount of merchantable timber found by the jury to be on the land is not error.
Paterson, J. — On April 21, 1875, plaintiff and defendant's assignors entered into an agreement by the terms of which the former leased unto the parties of the second part certain lands for general lumbering purposes. The contract provides: “ Said parties of the second part hereby agree and bind themselves to cut and remove from said land all of the merchantable timber fit for saw-logs on said land, as follows: The first year, at least fifteen hundred thousand feet, board measure, and each and every year thereafter, two million feet, [554]board measure, and as much more as they may think proper, and pay said party of the first part therefor one dollar in United States gold coin for each and every thousand feet, board measure, of merchantable lumber so as aforesaid to be by them taken from said land; such payments to be made in equal installments, quarterly, each year; provided, however, that if said parties of the second part do not remove the amount of timber above specified to be taken in any one year, they shall, nevertheless, pay therefor; and they may remove the same in any subsequent year, without further charge or pay..... The term of this lease and the rights hereby granted shall be and continue twenty years from the date hereof, and at the expiration of said term said parties of the second part may, at their option, renew this lease for such length of time as they shall choose, on making a written demand of said party of the first part, and on paying rent, at the rate of ten dollars per year, in addition to the stumpage rent hereby reserved for each year the same shall be occupied under such renewed lease for lumbering or milling purposes.”
Plaintiff contends that under this contract he is entitled to recover five hundred dollars quarterly as rent or royalty, so long as the defendant remains in possession of the land under the contract, whether the timber has been removed or not. The court below held that the defendant was liable only for the value of the merchantable timber fit for saw-logs at one dollar per thousand, and gave judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $3,343,—the value, at one dollar per thousand, of the timber remaining on the land and not paid for, — with interest thereon and costs of suit. Plaintiff moved for a new trial, claiming that the court ought to have given him a judgment for five thousand dollars, the amount of rent at two thousand dollars per annum since the last payment. The motion was denied, and plaintiff appealed-from the order and from the judgment.
[555]
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)