Case ID: ill-app_183/html/0236-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Fitch", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Northwestern University, Defendant in Error, v. John Hughes, Plaintiff in Error.
    Gen. No. 18,551.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Landlord and tenant, § 94*—when occupant under voidable lease is tenant from month to month. A tenant entering into possession and paying rent monthly under a lease voidable under the statute of frauds is a tenant from month to month and is entitled to a thirty days’ notice to quit.
    2. Landlord and tenant, § 503
      
      —when verdict for possession may be directed. Where it appears in an action of forcible detainepthat the occupant is in possession under a lease voidable under the statute of frauds and is a tenant from month to month and thirty days’ notice has been given, the question is one of law and a verdict for the plaintiff may be directed.
    3. Frauds, statute of, § 96
      
      —When part performance of invalid contract will not avoid statute. Where a written lease under seal for five years is signed by the lessor’s agent, having only verbal authority, receipt of rent by the lessor amounts to nothing more than a partial performance of a contract invalid under the statute of frauds, which will not, in a court of law, avoid the statute.
    
      Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph Sabath, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 20, 1913.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action of forcible detainer by Northwestern University, a corporation, against John Hughes to recover possession of leased property. From a judgment of possession for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
    Montgomery, Hart & Smith, for plaintiff in error.
    F. L. Salisbury and M. Marso, for defendant in error.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Frauds, statute of, § 41*—when want of authority of agent will not prevent recovery of leased property. In the absence of any fiduciary relations between parties, neglect to notify a tenant that the agent of landlord had no written authority to execute a lease for five, years is not a fraud, and coupled with the fact that the lessor supposed the lease was for one or two years will not support a contention that to permit a recovery of the possession of the premises, after thirty days’ notice to the tenant as a monthly tenant under an invalid lease, permits the statute of frauds to be used to perpetrate a fraud.

5. Principal and agent, § 102*—duty to ascertain agent’s authority to sign a lease. Party dealing with an agent of a lessor is bound to take notice that the agent’s authority to sign lessor’s name to a lease for five years must be in writing.

Mr. Justice Gridlby took no part in the decision of this case.