¶1The court
¶2held
¶3that the assignment to the petitioner, being the act of the law, did not work a forfeiture; and that an assignment by him. as the agent of the law, to a purchaser of the leasehold interest, would be equally without the proviso.
1 F. Cas. 444
Allen v. Bennett
Decided July 1, 1872
Connecticut District Court · decided 1872-07-01
<p>Case No. 214.</p> <p>Lease — Condition against Assignment — Breach —Bankrupcty.</p> <p>This was a bill in equity brought by an as-signee in bankruptcy to enjoin one who had leased a store to the bankrupt from disturbing the petitioner’s possession. The lease stated that the store was to be used by the bankrupt as a dry goods store, and provided for a forfeiture in case of an assignment without the written consent of the lessor.</p>
Decided 1872-07-01