Smith v. Roberts
Illinois Court of Appeals
370 N.E.2d 271 (1977)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Roberts Brothers (defendant) operated a clothing store. Roberts agreed to lease, from the Smiths (plaintiffs), a property directly attached to the store. Roberts intended to connect the premises and create an annexed room for its store. The lease contained a clause excusing Roberts’s performance if the leased property was destroyed through no fault of its own. After the lease was signed, Roberts’s main store was destroyed by fire. As a result, Roberts did not occupy the annexed property it had leased from the Smiths and did not pay rent. The Smiths brought suit, alleging breach of the lease. The trial court held that Roberts was excused from performance under the lease due to the fire. The Smiths appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mills, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.
