Consolidated Mortgage Co. v. Roberts

MUSSELL, J. Defendant appeals from a judgment for plaintiff in an unlawful detainer action involving a storeroom in Laguna Beach. Defendant occupied the premises from October 1, 1943 to September 30, 1948, as lessee under the terms of a written lease, which, by its terms and an extension thereof, expired on the last mentioned date. Defendant then refused to vacate, claiming that plaintiff had orally agreed to a renewal of the lease for an additional term. Plaintiff on October 2,1948, commenced the present action and obtained a judgment for possession of the property, a termination of the lease, and damages in the sum of $156.25.

The principal and controlling question here is whether the lease was extended or renewed by the conversations and correspondence between the parties and their agents. We conclude that it was not and that the findings and judgment are sufficiently supported by the evidence.

Defendant bases his claim of a right to occupy the store room after the termination of the written lease upon two conversations had with one J. C. McCormick, who for several years prior to May 10, 1948, was general manager and secretary-treasurer of plaintiff corporation. The first of these conversations was by telephone “in the early part of the summer of 1947,” and defendant testified concerning it as follows:

1 ‘ Q. Will you please relate that conversation ?

“A. Yes. I called Mr. McCormick and I told him I had a party that was interested in buying the store and one of the things that was interesting them was the terms of the lease, and before they would pay the price I was asking, they would want assurance from him that the lease would be renewed for another term of five years. Shall I go on from there?

“Q. Yes, just give us the conversation.

“A. Mr. McCormick said he thought that would be all right, but the terms of a new lease would be up $25.00, or ' making it a hundred dollars, that he would have to take it up with one of the officers of the company, and that he would [66]like to see and approve of the people that were contemplating going in. ’ ’

The second conversation, according to defendant, occurred “maybe sixty days later” and was “kind of a running conversation.” Defendant testified that McCormick made the following statement: