Clairton Corp. v. Geo-Con, Inc.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
635 A.2d 1058 (1993)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Clairton Corporation (plaintiff) rented a commercial building to Geo-Con, Inc. (defendant) for a period of two years. At the end of the two-year term, the parties were discussing a new lease under which Geo-Con would rent more space. Ultimately, the parties did not come to a formal agreement on a new lease. Rather, Geo-Con, with Clairton’s consent, simply continued to possess the leased premises, paying the same monthly rent that was due under the expired lease. After seven months, Geo-Con vacated the premises and stopped paying rent. Clairton brought suit, claiming that Geo-Con’s holdover tenancy must last for one full year. Clairton thus sought rent for the remaining five months of that term. Geo-Con argued that when the original lease expired it had become a month-to-month tenant. The trial court ruled that Geo-Con had become a month-to-month tenant. Clairton appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cirillo, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.