Mettler v. Braly

GRIFFIN, J. In the first of these two consolidated actions appellant, Emanuel H. Mettler brought an action for declaratory relief against respondent Benjamin F. Braly to construe the legal rights and duties of the parties pertaining to a certain lease of laud in Tulare County respecting the payment of taxes. Thereafter, respondent brought an action against appellant seeking to recover $4,191.78 plus attorneys’ fees [653]and costs for a claimed breach of the lease in this respect. The same issue is presented by each action.

According to the evidence and the lease of the 320 acres of dry, unleveled wheat land involved, which lease was dated February 14, 1949, effective July 1st, and its subsequent modification of June 7, 1949, to include an additional 120 acres, respondent Braly, then 86 years of age, leased to appellant the 320-acre tract at $3,200 and the 120-acre tract at $1,200 per year. Respondent testified that appellant told him he was going to level the land, put down wells, install pumps and irrigate the land and put houses on it; that appellant had a lease prepared by a “real estate man” and left it with respondent (this proposed lease had no provision in reference to increased taxes); that he told appellant before he would sign it appellant would have to pay the “raise in taxes ... on all the improA'ements they put on there . . . houses—wells—pipe lines, and the leveling,” with the right of removal, and that he understood from the conversation that appellant agreed he would do that and change the lease accordingly; that thereafter he went to the real estate office and signed the lease as changed, and that at that time it had been signed by the appellant. Appellant took immediate possession of the property, drilled wells, installed pumps and pipe lines, leveled and fertilized the soil, moved certain buildings onto the property and generally made other betterments to the leased premises. The lease was for a period of 10 years with five years’ option to extend, plus option to purchase certain land at $150 per acre. It also provided for reasonable attorneys’ fees. Each lease contained this provision, which is the crux of this action;

“The lessee covenants and agrees to pay the said rental at the time and in the manner hereinabove set out and to pay or reimburse lessor, when due, for the amount of taxes assessed against all improvements made by the lessee upon the leased land during the term of this lease.”

At the trial it was agreed that there was a great increase in the assessment and taxes on the real estate in the following four years due to the plaintiff’s betterment of the land, and that the additional taxes thereon amounted to $4,191.78. It was further agreed that appellant Mettler paid all taxes assessed upon improvements, as improvements are defined in section 105 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, as treated independent of the land in the tax statement issued for the leased premises and for the period in question, and that