Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

152 Mass. 561

Chalmers v. Smith

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 6, 1891

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1891-01-06

<p> Landlord and Tenant—Tenancy at Will—Voluntary Waste—Waiver. </p> <p>A tenant at will is under an implied agreement to use the premises in a tenant-like manner, "and not by his voluntary act unnecessarily to injure them; and if he places in a barn hired by him a weight apparently and in fact excessive, which causes the barn to fall, he is guilty of voluntary waste, and is liable therefor upon his implied agreement.</p> <p>Acceptance of rent by a landlord for the full term for which the premises are let is not necessarily a waiver of his right to damages for breach of the tenant’s implied agreement not to commit voluntary waste.</p>

Relies on United States v. Bostwick · Lothrop v. Thayer · Starr v. Jackson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1891-01-06

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 2011

14 state decisions

301891190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Khowltoh, J.

¶1The jury have found that the defendants unreasonably used the plaintiff’s bam by putting into it a weight which was apparently, and in fact, excessive. This was something more,than a mere omission which would constitute permissive waste. It was a positive, unreasonable act, of a kind likely to cause injury to the plaintiffs’ property. Such an act, which results in damage, is voluntary waste on the part of a tenant who is guilty of it.

¶2A tenant at will who commits voluntary waste is liable to his landlord in an action of trespass quare clausum. His act terminates his right as a tenant, and entitles the landlord to treat him as a trespasser in doing it. Starr v. Jackson, 11 Mass. 519. Lienow v. Ritchie, 8 Pick. 235. Daniels v. Pond, 21 Pick. 367. Lothrop v. Thayer, 138 Mass. 466, 473.

¶3A tenant at will as well as a tenant for life or for yéars is under an implied agreement to use the premises in a tenant-like manner, and not by his voluntary act unnecessarily to injure them. While this agreement does not include an obligation on the part of a tenant at will to repair defects resulting from the action of the elements, or from a reasonable use of the premises, or from an unavoidable accident, it creates a liability in an action of contract for a wrongful act in violation of it. 1 Add. Cont. (8th ed.) 383. Holford v. Dunnett, 7 M. & W. 348. United States v. Bostwick, 94 U. S. 53, 66.

¶4The acceptance of rent by the plaintiffs for the full term was not necessarily a waiver of their right to recover damages for a breach of this contract. It was merely evidence for the consideration of the jury upon the question whether there was a waiver. A liability in damages for an act of this kind may well be enforced in an action of contract, notwithstanding that the rent has been fully paid.

¶5Upon the facts which the jury must have found, the action can be maintained on the second count, and the ruling of the presiding justice was therefore correct. Whether the plaintiffs waived their right to maintain an action of trespass quare clausum by permitting the defendants to be in possession of the premises, and accepting rent for a long time after the build*565ing fell, or whether the defects in pleading in the first count, treating it as a count in trespass, could be taken advantage of by the defendants’ request for a ruling at the close of the evidence, it is unnecessary to decide.

¶6 Judgment for the plaintiffs.

/152/mass/561 · .json · Public domain