Title: KOSENA v ECK

State: montana

Issuer: Montana Supreme Court

Document:

No. 80-205 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1981 BRUCE A. KOSENA, d/b/a THE PUB, Plaintiff and Appellant, NORMAN E. ECK, TRUSTEE OF JOHN A. ECK, TRUST, Defendants and Respondents. Appeal from: District Court of the First Judicial District, In and for the County of Lewis & Clark, The Honorable H. William Coder, Judge presiding, Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Robert T. Cumrnins, Helena, Montana Charles A. Smith, Helena, Montana For Respondent: Jackson, Oitzinger & Pflurdo, Helena, Montana Filed: Submitted on Briefs: April 15, 1981 Decided: October 29, 1951 OCT 2 9 1981 Mr. J u s t i c e Daniel J. Shea d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. P l a i n t i f f a p p e a l s , and d e f e n d a n t s c r o s s - a p p e a l , from a judgment e n t e r e d i n Lewis and Clark County D i s t r i c t Court d e c l a r i n g t h e r i g h t s of t h e p l a i n t i f f a s t e n a n t and t h e d e f e n d a n t s a s l a n d l o r d s . The t r i a l c o u r t r u l e d i n f a v o r of t e n a n t t h a t a v a l i d l e a s e agreement e x i s t e d , t h a t t h e r e n t a l due under t h e l e a s e was $650 p e r month, and t h a t l a n d l o r d s must pay t e n a n t $5,000 a s t h e i r s h a r e of t h e c o s t s of r e p a i r s made by t e n a n t . The t r i a l c o u r t r u l e d i n f a v o r of l a n d l o r d s t h a t t e n a n t d i d n o t have a v a l i d mechanics' l i e n f o r r e p a i r s which he had completed on t h e p r e m i s e s , and t h a t t h e land- l o r d s were e n t i t l e d t o prejudgment i n t e r e s t on t h e r e n t a l payments. The t r i a l c o u r t f u r t h e r r u l e d t h a t both p a r t i e s must bear t h e i r own c o s t s and a t t o r n e y f e e s . W e a f f i r m t h e f i r s t two r u l i n g s a s t o t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e l e a s e agreement and t h e amount t o be paid--$650 p e r month. W e remand t o t h e t r i a l c o u r t f o r f u r t h e r f i n d i n g s a s t o t h e amount awarded t o t e n a n t t o compensate him f o r r e p a i r s t o t h e premises. W e r e v e r s e t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s r u l i n g t h a t no m e c h a n i c s ' l i e n e x i s t e d , t h e award o f prejudgment i n t e r e s t , and t h e o r d e r t h a t each s i d e bear i t s own c o s t s and a t t o r n e y f e e s . On February 29, 1968, J. A. E c k and Marie A. E c k , t h e p a r e n t s and p r e d e c e s s o r s of t h e l a n d l o r d s , l e a s e d a p o r t i o n of a Helena b u s i n e s s b u i l d i n g t o Reginald L. Brewer and William 0 . Bahny. The o t h e r p o r t i o n of t h i s b u i l d i n g , known a s "Howard's P i z z a , " was e x p r e s s l y excepted from t h e l e a s e agreement. The l e a s e agreement had a primary term of f i v e y e a r s w i t h an o p t i o n t o renew f o r f i v e a d d i t i o n a l y e a r s . I t f u r t h e r provided f o r a r e n t a l r a t e of $275 p e r month, t o be a d j u s t e d by any i n c r e a s e i n t a x e s on t h e premises above t h e 1967 t a x e s . The l e a s e d premises, known a s "The Pub," was o p e r a t e d a s a bar by Brewer and Bahny. The l e a s e agreement r e q u i r e d t h a t an assignment of t h e l e a s e be s u b j e c t t o t h e w r i t t e n c o n s e n t of t h e l a n d l o r d s . On A p r i l 24, 1968, one of t h e o r i g i n a l t e n a n t s , Bahny, s o l d h i s one-half i n t e r e s t i n "The Pub" t o Bruce A. Kosena, t h e t e n a n t involved h e r e . A s p a r t o f t h i s a g r e e m e n t t h e t e n a n t o b t a i n e d a w r i t t e n assignment of l e a s e from Bahny, a s w e l l a s a w r i t t e n c o n s e n t t o assignment of l e a s e from t h e l a n d l o r d s . The t e n a n t and Brewer continued t o j o i n t l y o p e r a t e "The Pub" u n t i l J a n u a r y 15, 1971, when Brewer s o l d h i s i n t e r e s t i n "The Pub" t o t h e t e n a n t , and s o t h e t e n a n t became t h e s o l e p r o p r i e t o r and l e s s e e . The w r i t t e n c o n s e n t of t h e l a n d l o r d s was not o b t a i n e d f o r t h i s t r a n s a c t i o n . However, t h e t e n a n t made t h e r e n t p a y m e n t s , and t h e l a n d l o r d s accepted t h e payments w i t h o u t o b j e c t i o n . Sometime i n 1972, t h a t p a r t of t h e b u i l d i n g known a s "Howard's Pizza" was t a k e n over by t h e t e n a n t and made a p a r t of "The Pub." The t e n a n t and l a n d l o r d s v e r b a l l y agreed t o make t h i s a d d i t i o n a l a r e a a p a r t of t h e l e a s e d premises and t o i n c r e a s e t h e r e n t a l t o $500 p e r month. The t e n a n t c o n t i n u e d t o o p e r a t e "The Pub" w i t h o u t f u r t h e r problems u n t i l J a n u a r y 1974, when t h e b u i l d i n g was s u b s t a n t i a l l y d e s t r o y e d by f i r e . The l e a s e agreement c o n t a i n e d a f i r e c l a u s e , which s t a t e d i n p a r t : "AND PROVIDED, ALSO t h a t i n c a s e t h e b u i l d i n g on s a i d d e m i s e d p r e m i s e s , o r a n y p a r t t h e r e o f , s h a l l d u r i n g s a i d term be d e s t r o y e d o r damaged by f i r e o r o t h e r u n a v o i d a b l e c a s u a l t y , s o t h a t t h e same s h a l l be u n f i t f o r u s e , then s a i d r e n t or p r o p o r t i o n a t e p a r t t h e r e o f s h a l l be abated u n t i l s a i d premises s h a l l have been p u t i n proper r e p a i r by t h e L e s s o r s , o r t h i s l e a s e s h a l l h a v e been determined, a t t h e i r e l e c t i o n . " A f t e r t h e f i r e , t h e t e n a n t found o t h e r employment, and c o n s i d e r e d r e l o c a t i n g h i s b u s i n e s s . I n June or J u l y 1974, approximately s i x months a f t e r t h e f i r e , n o t having found a p l a c e t o r e l o c a t e , t h e t e n a n t d i s c u s s e d w i t h t h e l a n d l o r d s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of r e s t o r i n g t h e o r i g i n a l b u i l d i n g . The l a n d l o r d s e l e c t e d t o r e s t o r e t h e b u i l d i n g , and t h e t e n a n t v e r b a l l y agreed t o r e s t o r e o r r e i n s t a l l t h e t h i n g s n e c e s s a r y t o o p e r a t e h i s b u s i n e s s . The r e p a i r s were completed, and t h e t e n a n t reopened "The Pub" i n November 1974. The p a r t i e s had a l s o v e r b a l l y agreed t h a t t h e r e n t remain a t $500 p e r month i n November and December 1974, b u t t o be i n c r e a s e d t o $650 i n J a n u a r y 1975. The t e n a n t p a i d t h e s e amounts and t h e l a n d l o r d s accepted them a s t h e y became due. However, i n e a r l y J a n u a r y 1975, t h e l a n d l o r d s a d v i s e d t e n a n t t h a t , commencing i n February 1975, t h e monthly r e n t would i n c r e a s e t o $1,175. T h i s s t a r t e d t h e d i s p u t e . The t e n a n t r e f u s e d t o pay t h e $1,175 and f i l e d a mechanics' l i e n a g a i n s t t h e premises i n t h e amount of $74,000, a l l e g e d l y t o recover t h e l a b o r and m a t e r i a l s he had expended i n r e s t o r i n g t h e premises a f t e r t h e f i r e . I n February 1975, t h e t e n a n t tendered a check f o r $650 which was r e f u s e d by t h e l a n d l o r d s , who still demanded $1,175 p e r month. The t e n a n t then f i l e d a l a w s u i t t o determine t h e e x i s t e n c e and terms of t h e l e a s e and t o a l s o f o r e c l o s e on t h e mechanics' l i e n . The t e n a n t continued t o pay $650 p e r month i n t o c o u r t and he o b t a i n e d a temporary r e s t r a i n i n g o r d e r t o p r e v e n t h i s e v i c t i o n . T r i a l was h e l d on February 16 and 17, 1978, and on A p r i l 26, 1978, t h e t r i a l c o u r t i s s u e d an o r d e r from which t h i s a p p e a l is taken. Because one r u l i n g depends on t h e o t h e r , we d i s c u s s t h e i s s u e s i n t h e f o l l o w i n g o r d e r . F i r s t , t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e l e a s e agreement; second, t h e l e g a l i t y of t h e l a n d l o r d s ' demand i n c r e a s i n g r e n t t o $1,175 per month from $650; t h i r d , t h e award of i n t e r e s t t o t h e l a n d l o r d s on each $650 payment t h e t e n a n t h a s been v o l u n t a r i l y d e p o s i t i n g i n c o u r t s i n c e he f i l e d t h e l a w s u i t ; f o u r t h , t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e mechanics' l i e n f i l e d by t h e t e n a n t ; f i f t h , t h e award of $5,000 t o t h e t e n a n t a s compensation f o r r e p a i r s ; s i x t h and f i n a l l y , t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s r u l i n g s on a t t o r n e y f e e s . VALIDITY O F LEASE AGREEMENT The l a n d l o r d s contend t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d i n n o t h o l d i n g t h a t t h e l e a s e was t e r m i n a t e d a s a m a t t e r of l a w . T h i s c o n t e n t i o n i s b a s e d i n p a r t on s e c t i o n 7 0 - 1 - 6 0 7 ( 4 ) , MCA, which s t a t e s i n p a r t : "When h i r i n g t e r m i n a t e s . The h i r i n g of a t h i n g t e r m i n a t e s : . . . ( 4 ) by t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of t h e t h i n g h i r e d . " T h i s s t a t u t e p r o v i d e s , d i s j u n c t i v e l y , s e v e r a l ways by which h i r i n g can t e r m i n a t e . However, t h e l a n d l o r d s urge t h a t s u b s e c t i o n ( 4 ) be a p p l i e d e x c l u s i v e l y t o t e r m i n a t e t h e l e a s e agreement. I n S o l i c h v. Hale ( 1 9 6 7 ) , 150 Mont. 358, 435 P. 2d 883, i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e p r e d e c e s s o r of s e c t i o n 70-1- 607, MCA, t h i s Court s t a t e d : " I f it i s f o u n d t h a t t h e b u i l d i n g i s d e s t r o y e d , by o p e r a t i o n of law t h e l e a s e would -be t e r m i n a t e d . Only an agreement t o t h e c o n t r a r y between t h e two p a r t i e s could p r e v e n t t h e a c t i o n of t h i s s t a t u t e [ s e c t i o n 70-1-607, MCA] ." 1 5 0 Mont. a t 361-362. (Emphasis added.) Here, t h e l e a s e agreement d o e s c o n t a i n an e x p r e s s agreement t o t h e c o n t r a r y which p r e c l u d e s t h e o p e r a t i o n of s e c t i o n 70-1-607, MCA. The l a n d l o r d s a l s o contend t h a t t h e o r i g i n a l l e a s e had been " s o long abandoned, d i s r e g a r d e d , and r e p u d i a t e d " t h a t it was void and i n e f f e c t i v e b e f o r e t h e time of t h e f i r e . T h i s c o n t e n t i o n is a p p a r e n t l y based on t h e f o l l o w i n g a l l e g a t i o n s : (1) T h a t t h e t e n a n t f a i l e d t o o b t a i n t h e w r i t t e n c o n s e n t t o t h e assignment of l e a s e from t h e l a n d l o r d s when t h e t e n a n t bought o u t Brewer's one-half i n t e r e s t i n "The Pub" on J a n u a r y 15, 1971. ( 2 ) T h a t t h e p a r t i e s , by v e r b a l l y modifying t h e l e a s e agreement, i n v a l i d a t e d t h e e n t i r e l e a s e . ( 3 ) F i n a l l y , t h a t t h e t e n a n t d i d n o t p r o p e r l y e x e r c i s e h i s o p t i o n t o extend t h e l e a s e term when t h e primary term e x p i r e d i n 1973. These c o n t e n t i o n s a r e supported n e i t h e r by t h e law nor by t h e f a c t s . I n t h e i r b r i e f , c o u n s e l f o r t h e l a n d l o r d s f a i l s t o c i t e any l e g a l a u t h o r i t y t o s u p p o r t t h e t h e o r y t h a t t h e w r i t t e n c o n s e n t o f t h e l a n d l o r d s i s an a b s o l u t e p r e r e q u i s i t e t o a v a l i d assignment of t h e l e a s e . I n f a c t , t h e g r e a t weight of a u t h o r i t y is t o t h e c o n t r a r y . F i r s t , a r e s t r i c t i o n imposed i n a l e a s e a g r e e m e n t a g a i n s t a n assignment of t h e l e a s e is a r e s t r a i n t a g a i n s t a l i e n a t i o n and is n o t looked upon w i t h f a v o r by t h e c o u r t s . Such r e s t r i c t i o n s a r e t o b e c o n s t r u e d s t r i c t l y a g a i n s t t h e l e s s o r . Gazlay v . Williams ( 6 t h C i r . 1 9 0 6 ) , 147 F. 678, a f f ' d , 210 U.S. 41, 28 S.Ct. 687, 52 L.Ed. 950. Such t e r m s must be g i v e n a l i m i t e d e f f e c t . Here, t h e l e a s e agreement, d a t e d February 29, 1968, and signed by t h e p r e d e c e s s o r s of both t h e t e n a n t and l a n d l o r d s , s t a t e s a s follows: "The Lessees a g r e e n o t t o s u b l e a s e o r a s s i g n a l l o r any p a r t of t h e demised premises d u r i n g t h e term of t h i s l e a s e w i t h o u t f i r s t o b t a i n i n g t h e w r i t t e n c o n s e n t of t h e L e s s o r s t h e r e t o . " (See page 5 of l e a s e agreement.) I n A p r i l 1968, t h e p r e d e c e s s o r s of t h e l a n d l o r d s consented i n w r i t i n g t o Bahny's assignment of h i s i n t e r e s t i n t h e l e a s e t o t h e t e n a n t . The l a n d l o r d s ' argument, however, c e n t e r s on t h e l a t e r d e p a r t u r e of t h e t e n a n t ' s c o - l e s s e e , Brewer, on January 15, 1971, when t h e t e n a n t took over t h e s o l e o p e r a t i o n of t h e l e a s e d premises. The t e n a n t had no l e g a l d u t y t o o b t a i n t h e l a n d l o r d s ' w r i t t e n c o n s e n t t o h i s agreement w i t h Brewer. The narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n demanded of such r e s t r i c t i o n s p r o h i b i t s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e p r o v i s i o n t o a subsequent assignment. Lipsker v. B i l l i n g s Boot Shop ( 1 9 5 5 ) , 129 Mont. 420, 288 P.2d 660. I n L i p s k e r , t h i s Court d e c l a r e d that, "The l a n d l o r d ' s c o n s e n t t o t h e [ o r i g i n a l ] assignment of a l e a s e o b v i a t e s t h e n e c e s s i t y of c o n s e n t t o subsequent a s s i g n - ments." 129 Mont. a t 427. The r e c o r d a l s o r e v e a l s t h a t t h e l a n d l o r d s knew t h a t t h e t e n a n t had become t h e s o l e p r o p r i e t o r and l e s s e e long b e f o r e t h i s d i s p u t e a r o s e . And, t h e l a n d l o r d s continued t o r e c e i v e r e n t a l payments from t h e t e n a n t f o r a t l e a s t f o u r y e a r s and never o b j e c t e d t o t h e assignment. The l a n d l o r d s h a v e l o n g waived a n y r i g h t t o a s s e r t b r e a c h o f t h e r e s t r i c t i o n . Crossman v. F o n t a i n b l e a u Hotel Corp. ( 5 t h C i r . 1 9 5 9 ) , 273 F.2d 720. The l a n d l o r d s ' c o u n s e l h a s a l s o i g n o r e d s e c t i o n 28-2-1602, MCA, which e x p r e s s l y s a n c t i o n s v e r b a l modifica- t i o n of w r i t t e n c o n t r a c t s , i n c l u d i n g , of c o u r s e , a w r i t t e n l e a s e . Rodgers v. Saunders ( 1 9 6 4 ) , 144 Mont. 424, 396 P.2d 817. Here, t h e executed v e r b a l agreements t o i n c r e a s e t h e r e n t a l payments and t o expand t h e l e a s e d premises, modified t h e l e a s e agreement. F i n a l l y , w e hold t h a t t h e t e n a n t v a l i d l y e x e r c i s e d h i s o p t i o n t o renew t h e l e a s e when t h e o r i g i n a l term e x p i r e d i n 1973. The agreement does n o t r e q u i r e t h a t such an o p t i o n must be e x e r c i s e d by w r i t t e n n o t i c e t o t h e l a n d l o r d s . The o p t i o n may be e x e r c i s e d v e r b a l l y o r even by conduct of t h e p a r t i e s which e x h i b i t s a c l e a r i n t e n t t o e x e r c i s e t h e o p t i o n , F l i n t v. Mincoff ( 1 9 6 0 ) , 137 Mont. 549, 353 P.2d 340, a q u e s t i o n of f a c t t o be determined by a l l of t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . Fun P r o d u c t s D i s t r i b u t o r s , I n c . v. Martens (Alaska 1 9 7 7 ) , 559 P.2d 1054. Here, t h e t r i a l c o u r t c o r r e c t l y r u l e d t h a t t h e t e n a n t e f f e c t i v e l y e x e r c i s e d h i s o p t i o n t o renew. Considering t h e s u b s t a n t i a l amount of l a b o r and m a t e r i a l s provided by t h e t e n a n t a f t e r t h e f i r e , a l l w i t h t h e knowledge and c o n s e n t of t h e l a n d l o r d s , it would be l u d i c r o u s t o i n f e r t h a t t h e p a r t i e s b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e primary l e a s e term had e x p i r e d and t h a t t e n a n t had become o n l y a month-to-month t e n a n t . The t e n a n t c l e a r l y demonstrated h i s i n t e n t t o e x e r c i s e t h e o p t i o n . W e h o l d , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e o r i g i n a l l e a s e agreement of February 1968 was s t i l l v a l i d and i n e f f e c t a t a l l times r e l e v a n t t o t h i s c a s e , u n t i l t h e e x p i r a t i o n of t h e o p t i o n term i n 1978, s u b j e c t t o t h e v e r b a l m o d i f i c a t i o n s made by t h e p a r t i e s . THE LANDLORDS' DEMAND FOR $1,175 PER MONTH RENTAL Our d e c i s i o n d e c l a r i n g t h a t t h e l e a s e agreement was v a l i d and e f f e c t i v e d i s p o s e s a l s o t h e l a n d l o r d s ' demand t h a t t h e r e n t be i n c r e a s e d t o $1,175 p e r month. The t e n a n t a t no t i m e consented t o r a i s e t h e monthly r e n t a l beyond $650, and t h e r e f o r e t h e l a n d l o r d s had no r i g h t t o i n c r e a s e t h e r e n t t o $1,175 per month. The terms of t h e l e a s e , a s modified by t h e p a r t i e s , had set t h e r e n t a l payments a t $650 p e r month. TRIAL COURT'S AWARD OF INTEREST The t r i a l c o u r t awarded t h e l a n d l o r d s i n t e r e s t on t h e r e n t a l payments " a t t h e r a t e of 6 p e r c e n t per annum from t h e due d a t e of each payment a s r e n t on t h e premises." Essen- t i a l l y , t h e t r i a l c o u r t determined t h a t i n t e r e s t should a c c r u e a s of t h e time t h a t each r e n t a l payment became due. The r e c o r d c l e a r l y shows t h a t i n F e b r u a r y 1 9 7 5 , t h e l a n d l o r d s r e f u s e d t o a c c e p t t h e $650 monthly r e n t payment tendered by t h e t e n a n t . The t e n a n t t h e n f i l e d a l a w s u i t and t e n d e r e d t h e $650 monthly payments i n t o c o u r t . H e had no o t h e r c h o i c e , a s t h e l a n d l o r d s prevented him from paying h i s d e b t a s it came due. S e c t i o n 27-1-211, MCA, c l e a r l y r e l e a s e s t h e t e n a n t from any o b l i g a t i o n t o pay i n t e r e s t : "27-1-211. R i g h t t o i n t e r e s t . Every person who is e n t i t l e d t o recover damages c e r t a i n o r c a p a b l e of being made c e r t a i n by c a l c u l a t i o n and t h e r i g h t t o recover which is v e s t e d i n him upon a p a r t i c u l a r day is e n t i t l e d a l s o t o recover i n t e r e s t t h e r e o n from t h a t day e x c e p t d u r i n g such time a s p r e v e n t e d b y l a w o r by t h e a c t o f t h e c r e d i t o r from - ------ p a y i n g t h e d e b t . " (Emphasis added.) Because t h e l a n d l o r d s were e n t i t l e d t o no more t h a n $650 per month, it was t h e i r own r e f u s a l t o a c c e p t t h e tendered payment, which r e s u l t e d i n t h e t e n a n t f i l i n g a l a w s u i t and prevented them from r e c e i v i n g each payment a s it became due. By any s t a n d a r d s , t h e conduct of t h e l a n d l o r d s prevented t h e t e n a n t from making t h e r e q u i r e d payments. The t e n a n t should n o t be p e n a l i z e d f o r a t t e m p t i n g t o comply w i t h t h e terms of t h e l e a s e agreement, nor should t h e l a n d l o r d s be r e w a r d e d f o r u n j u s t i f i a b l y r e f u s i n g t o a c c e p t t h e payments. The o r d e r allowing i n t e r e s t is r e v e r s e d . THE VALIDITY OF PLAINTIFF'S MECHANICS' LIEN Upon t h e i r e l e c t i o n t o r e p a i r , t h e l a n d l o r d s became bound under t h e l e a s e agreement t o make such r e p a i r s a s n e c e s s a r y t o p r o v i d e t h e t e n a n t w i t h s u i t a b l e premises t o o p e r a t e h i s b u s i n e s s . The l a n d l o r d s w i l l f u l l y abrogated t h e i r d u t y under t h i s c o n t r a c t when t h e y r e f u s e d t o complete t h e r e p a i r s . T h i s r e f u s a l compelled t h e t e n a n t t o complete t h e r e p a i r s h i m s e l f , and he d i d s o w i t h t h e knowledge and c o n s e n t of t h e l a n d l o r d s . These f a c t s e s t a b l i s h an implied c o n t r a c t between t h e p a r t i e s . An implied c o n t r a c t is s u f f i c i e n t t o s u p p o r t a v a l i d mechanics' l i e n . M & R Const. Co. v. Shea ( 1 9 7 9 ) , - Mont . , 589 P.2d 138, 36 St.Rep. 37. (See a l s o c a s e s c i t e d t h e r e i n . ) T h i s Court h a s noted t h a t a mechanics' l i e n ". . . is a c r e a t u r e of s t a t u t e , remedial i n n a t u r e , w i t h its f o u n d a t i o n i n e q u i t y and n a t u r a l j u s t i c e , n o t c o n t r a c t . " Beck v. Hanson ( 1 9 7 8 ) , - Mont. , 589 P.2d 141, 144. The e q u i t i e s were c l e a r l y i n f a v o r of t h e t e n a n t . The l a n d l o r d s w i l l f u l l y breached t h e i r promise t o r e p a i r , and t h e y were f u l l y aware t h a t t h e t e n a n t was t h e n compelled t o complete t h e work. A f t e r t h e t e n a n t had c o m p l e t e d t h e r e p a i r s , t h e l a n d l o r d s t h e n a t t e m p t e d , c o n t r a r y t o t h e terms of t h e l e a s e , t o d r a s t i c a l l y i n c r e a s e t h e r e n t a l payments. That can h a r d l y be c l a s s i f i e d a s f a i r d e a l i n g . I n denying t h e mechanics' l i e n , however, t h e t r i a l c o u r t r e l i e d on a c l a u s e i n t h e l e a s e which r e q u i r e d t h e t e n a n t t o "pay and d i s c h a r g e " any l i e n s f i l e d a g a i n s t t h e premises. That c l a u s e r e q u i r e d t h e t e n a n t : "1. To pay and d i s c h a r g e promptly, a l l l i e n s and o b l i g a t i o n s o f any n a t u r e and k i n d whatsoever which may a t t a c h t o o r be imposed upon s a i d premises, o r t o s a i d l e a s e h o l d , c r e a t e d o r i n c u r r e d by s a i d Lessees, t o pay a l l r e a s o n a b l e c o s t s , a t t o r n e y ' s f e e and expenses t h a t s h a l l be made a n d - o c c u r r e d by t h e L e s s o r s i n e n f o r c i n g t h e covenants of t h e agreements i n t h i s l e a s e . " (Emphasis added.) The c l e a r i n t e n t of t h i s c l a u s e is t o p r o h i b i t t h e t e n a n t from having work done which would r e s u l t i n a l i e n f i l e d a g a i n s t t h e premises, o r t o pay t h e l i e n s i f f i l e d . But h e r e it was t h e l a n d l o r d s who i n i t i a t e d t h e r e p a i r s . The l a n d l o r d s , by e l e c t i n g t o r e p a i r t h e premises a f t e r t h e f i r e , " c r e a t e d o r i n c u r r e d " t h e o b l i g a t i o n t o complete such r e p a i r s . The t e n a n t was compelled t o do t h e work when t h e l a n d l o r d s f a i l e d t o complete it a f t e r e l e c t i n g t o r e p a i r t h e premises under t h e f i r e c l a u s e i n t h e l e a s e . The t r i a l c o u r t a l s o noted s e v e r a l a l l e g e d t e c h n i c a l d e f e c t s i n t h e mechanics' l i e n . S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e t r i a l c o u r t r e f e r r e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l i e n was f i l e d by "Bruce A . Kosena" whereas t h i s a c t i o n was f i l e d by "Bruce A . Kosena, d / b / a The Pub." T h i s is an i n c o n s e q u e n t i a l t e c h n i c a l d i s c r e p a n c y , and it w i l l n o t i n v a l i d a t e a n o t h e r w i s e v a l i d l i e n . The l i e n s t a t u t e must be i n t e r p r e t e d l i b e r a l l y t o p r o t e c t t h e r i g h t of t h e l i e n . Morrison-Maierle I n c . v . S e l s c o ( 1 9 8 0 ) , - Mont. , 606 P.2d 1085, 37 St.Rep. 299; F a u s e t t v. Blanchard ( 1 9 6 9 ) , 154 Mont. 301, 463 P.2d 319. Furthermore, t h e f a c t t h a t some of t h e i t e m s claimed i n t h e l i e n may n o t be l i e n a b l e does n o t i n v a l i d a t e t h e e n t i r e l i e n . Smith v. Gunniss ( 1 9 4 4 ) , 115 Mont. 362, 144 P.2d 186; Caird Engineering Works v. Seven-Up Gold Mining Co. ( 1 9 4 0 ) , 111 Mont. 471, 111 P.2d 267. The l a n d l o r d s ' conduct throughout t h i s t r a n s a c t i o n is i n e x c u s a b l e . T h e i r w i l l f u l breach of an o b l i g a t i o n t o r e p a i r t h e p r e m i s e s , and t h e i r r a t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s i g n i f i c a n t r e p a i r s made by t h e t e n a n t , is a l o n e a s u f f i c i e n t l e g a l b a s i s f o r t h e f i l i n g of a mechanics' l i e n . F u r t h e r , t h e i r t o t a l l y u n j u s t i f i e d demand f o r d r a s t i c a l l y i n c r e a s e d r e n t a l p a y m e n t s a f t e r t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e r e p a i r s p r e s e n t s an even s t r o n g e r e q u i t a b l e b a s i s t o uphold t h e l i e n . The t e n a n t is e n t i t l e d t o a mechanics' l i e n i n t h e f u l l amount of t h e v a l u e of any permanent r e p a i r s t h a t were t h e d u t y of t h e l a n d l o r d s t o p r o v i d e . TRIAL COURT AWARD OF $5,000 T O TENANT AS COMPENSATION FOR REPAIRS The t r i a l c o u r t o r d e r e d t h e l a n d l o r d s t o pay a sum of $5,000 t o compensate t h e t e n a n t f o r r e p a i r s t h a t he made t o r e s t o r e t h e premises af t e r t h e f i r e . The t r i a l c o u r t a r r i v e d a t t h i s f i g u r e i n a m y s t e r i o u s way. The t r i a l c o u r t l i s t e d items which were i n s t a l l e d by t h e t e n a n t and which were of b e n e f i t both t o t h e t e n a n t and t h e l a n d l o r d s . The c o u r t valued t h e s e i t e m s a t $10,000, and t h e n determined t h a t t h e p a r t i e s should " s h a r e e q u a l l y " t h e c o s t of t h e s e items. But no b a s i s e x i s t s i n t h e r e c o r d f o r t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s v a l u a t i o n of t h e items a t $10,000, or f o r t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t t h i s c o s t should be s h a r e d e q u a l l y by t h e p a r t i e s . W e r e v e r s e t h i s p a r t of t h e c o u r t ' s judgment and remand f o r f u r t h e r f i n d i n g s a s t o t h e e x a c t v a l u e of t h e r e p a i r s f o r which t h e t e n a n t may r e c o v e r . Absent an agreement t o t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e common law r u l e is t h a t t h e l e s s o r h a s no d u t y t o r e p a i r . S o l i c h , s u p r a . Here t h e r e is an agreement t o r e p a i r c o n t a i n e d i n t h e l e a s e agreement, and when t h e l a n d l o r d s e l e c t e d t o r e p a i r and r e s t o r e t h e premises, t h e y became bound by t h i s agreement t o make t h e r e p a i r s n e c e s s a r y t o r e s t o r e t h e premises t o a t e n a n t a b l e c o n d i t i o n . The l a n d l o r d s f a i l e d t o do t h i s , and t h e t e n a n t was compelled t o complete t h e work. Under t h e agreement, t h e l a n d l o r d s a r e l i a b l e f o r t h e c o s t s i n c u r r e d by t h e t e n a n t i n completing t h e r e p a i r s t h a t were t h e l a n d l o r d s ' d u t y t o p r o v i d e . THE TENANT I S ENTITLED T O ATTORNEY FEES INCURRED I N ENFORCING THE LEASF AGEEE?IZ1JT AiJD ATTORNEYS FZES ' FORECLOSING THE MECHANICS L I E N I n its o r i g i n a l f i n d i n g s of f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s of law, t h e t r i a l c o u r t h e l d t h a t (1) t h e t e n a n t was e n t i t l e d 4 3 t o a t t o r n e y f e e s p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n .83-8601.1, R.C.M. 1947, f o r e n f o r c i n g t h e covenants of t h e l e a s e , and ( 2 ) t h a t t h e l a n d l o r d s were e n t i t l e d , under s e c t i o n 93-8614, R.C.M. 1947 (now s e c t i o n 71-3-124, MCA), t o recover r e a s o n a b l e c o s t s of defending a g a i n s t t h e mechanics' l i e n p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 93-8614, R.C.M. 1947. But l a t e r , t h e t r i a l c o u r t o r d e r e d t h a t each p a r t y bear its own c o s t s and a t t o r n e y f e e s . W e r e v e r s e t h i s o r d e r . The t e n a n t is e n t i t l e d t o t h e r e a s o n a b l e c o s t s of a t t o r n e y f e e s i n c u r r e d i n e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e v a l i d i t y of h i s l e a s e . By demanding, u n j u s t i f i a b l y , a d r a s t i c a l l y i n c r e a s e d r e n t a l payment from t h e t e n a n t and by t a k i n g l e q a l a c t i o n t o f o r c e t h e t e n a n t t o q u i t t h e premises, t h e l a n d l o r d s r e f u s e d t o r e c o g n i z e t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e l e a s e . The t e n a n t was f o r c e d t o s u e t o determine t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e l e a s e , and s e c t i o n 28-3-704, MCA, p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e t e n a n t is e n t i t l e d t o a t t o r n e y f e e s s o i n c u r r e d . Because t h e o r i g i n a l l e a s e agreement was e n t e r e d i n t o b e f o r e t h e " e f f e c t i v e d a t e " ( J u l y 1, 1971) of s e c t i o n 28-3-704, MCA, counsel f o r t h e l a n d l o r d s contends t h a t t h i s s t a t u t e d o e s n o t a p p l y h e r e . Undoubtedly confusion e x i s t s a s t o t h e " e f f e c t i v e d a t e " p r o v i s i o n . See Belgrade S t a t e Bank v. Swainson ( 1 9 7 8 ) , 176 Mont. 444, 578 P.2d 1166; Belgrade S t a t e Bank v. Swainson ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 172 Mont. 350, 564 P.2d 174. But w e need n o t r e c o n s i d e r t h a t i s s u e h e r e . The d a t e of t h e agreement a t i s s u e is t h e d a t e on which t h e l e a s e agreement was renewed, March 3, 1973. The s t a t u t e was t h e n i n e f f e c t . Because t h e l a n d l o r d s have a s s e r t e d t h a t t h e t e n a n t d i d n o t p r o p e r l y e x e r c i s e h i s o p t i o n t o renew t h e l e a s e , t h e t e n a n t was f o r c e d t o s u e t o e s t a b l i s h t h e v a l i d i t y of h i s o p t i o n . S e c t i o n 28-3-704, MCA, a p p l i e s . W e have p r e v i o u s l y r e j e c t e d t h e l a n d l o r d s ' argument t h a t t h i s s t a t u t e d o e s n o t apply t o a p a r t y who s t a r t e d t h e l a w s u i t . Compton v. Alcorn ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 1 7 1 Mont. 230, 235, 557 P.2d 292. Because w e have r u l e d t h a t t h e t e n a n t had a v a l i d mechanics' l i e n , t h e l a n d l o r d s a r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o a t t o r n e y f e e s f o r d e f e a t i n g a mechanics' l i e n . R a t h e r , t h e t e n a n t is e n t i t l e d t o a t t o r n e y f e e s f o r t h e c o s t s i n c u r r e d i n e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e mechanics' l i e n . See s e c t i o n 71-3-124, MCA. The record does n o t e s t a b l i s h t h e e x a c t amount of a t t o r n e y f e e s i n c u r r e d by t h e t e n a n t and t h e r e f o r e we must remand f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s t o e s t a b l i s h t h e proper amount. The t e n a n t is e n t i t l e d t o recover t h e r e a s o n a b l e attorney fees incurred in establishing the validity of the lease and in foreclosing on his mechanics' lien. This includes also the attorney fees incurred in presenting this appeal. The District Court judgment is af firmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. We concur: ? h a & , ) . % - Chief '3ustice