Case ID: ohio-law-abs_2/html/0731-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "VICKERY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 766
    HOLLINGSWORTH v. MUELLER et al
    Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist., Cuyahoga County
    No. 5216.
    Decided Sept. 22, 1924
    703. LANDLORD AND TENANT — Landlord’s promise to repair premises gives him no right of control or occupation thereof.
    Attorneys — C. E. Alden, Esq., for Hollings-worth; A. C. Knight, Esq., for Mueller.
   VICKERY, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Published Only in Ohio Law Abstract

Action instituted in Cuyahoga Common Pleas to recover dameges resulting from defective condition of rented property. The trial court directed verdict for Mueller. Affirming the judgment below, the. Cuyahoga Court of Appeals held:

1. Landlord’s promise to repair premises rented gives landlord no control of property.

2. Promise to repair rented premises gives landlord no right of occupation.