TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Tracy v. Albany Exchange Co.

John Tracy Against the Albany Exchange Company

Tracy v. Albany Exch. Co., 7 N.Y. 472 (1852)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 5, 1852
Judges
JEWETT, J., delivered the opinion of the court.
Citations
7 N.Y. 4727 N.Y.3d 4721 Seld. Notes 29
Headnotes
Lease; breach of covenant by lessors; measure of damages.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff was the lessee of a store for two years and six months from Nov. 1, 1846, at a rent of $1,000 a year, payable quarterly, under a lease executed by the defendant to him, which contained the following covenant:

“ The said party of the second part to have the refusal of the premises, at the expiration of this lease, for three years longer.”

On the 1st of February, 1849, the plaintiff requested a new lease from three years from May 1st, 1849, at the same rent. The defendant refused to give it; and sub *30 sequently gave notice to the plaintiff that, unless he would accept a new lease at $1,300 a year rent, the premises would be rented to another. At the time of the request and refusal, there was rent in arrear. The defendant, after this threat, and on the 10th Feb., 1849, accepted a new lease for one year from the 1st of May following, at a rent of $1,300 a year; protesting, however, against the right of defendant to exact an increased rent, and claiming to reserve his right of action, on the above covenant, for the alleged breach of which this action is brought.

Held, that the covenant gave the plaintiff a right, a,t his election, to a new lease for three years from the termination of the old one, and at the same rent.

That the election to take a new lease might be made before the expiration of the old one.

That the refusal of the defendant to execute a new lease, unless at an increased rent, was a breach of the covenant. - That the covenants of the old lease were not merged in, or satisfied by, the new one, nor was the plaintiff’s right of action waived by his acceptance, under protest, of the new lease.

That rent being in arrear did not affect the plaintiff’s right of action, the payment of rent not being a condition precedent to the right of renewal.

That the measure of damages was the difference between the rent which the defendant was to have paid according to the first lease, and that which was demanded of him in the second, less a rebate of interest.

(S. C., 7 N. Y. 472 .)

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 36 cases

View all citing references →
1881–1882: 21893–1894: 11895–1896: 21897–1898: 11899–1900: 11901–1902: 11907–1908: 11909–1910: 21913–1914: 11915–1916: 21917–1918: 11919–1920: 21921–1922: 11923–1924: 11925–1926: 31927–1928: 11935–1936: 11937–1938: 11945–1946: 11957–1958: 21969–1970: 11973–1974: 11975–1976: 11979–1980: 21989–1990: 12003–2004: 12017–2018: 118812026peak 1925 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kelly v. Varnes52 A.D. 100 (1900)
  2. Kollock v. Scribner73 N.W. 776 (Wis. 1897)
  3. I. X. L. Furniture & Carpet Installment House v. Berets91 P. 279 (Utah 1907)
  4. Street-Whittington Co. v. Sayres172 S.W. 772 (Tex. App. 1915)
  5. Eastern Systems, Inc. v. West 45th Street Industrial Condominiums, Inc. (In re Eastern Systems, Inc.)105 B.R. 219 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1989)
  6. Martin v. Schumacher70 A.D.2d 1 (1979)

Most recent

  1. LaCarrubba v. Outdoors Clothing Corp.57 Misc. 3d 69 (2017)
  2. Subcarrier Communications, Inc. v. Satra Realty, LLC11 A.D.3d 829 (2004)
  3. Eastern Systems, Inc. v. West 45th Street Industrial Condominiums, Inc. (In re Eastern Systems, Inc.)105 B.R. 219 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1989)
  4. Cohen v. Nonoo101 Misc. 2d 1037 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1979)
  5. Martin v. Schumacher70 A.D.2d 1 (1979)
  6. Eastern Associates, Inc. v. Sarubin336 A.2d 765 (Md. 1975)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list