Court Opinion

ID: 9566806
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:43:28.536284+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:32.184533
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(concurring specially).
I write specially to point out that Michael Reynolds’ rights in the property as a lessee were subject to the rights and obligations of his lessor, Agri-Business, to the owner, Andrews. Hickman v. Long, 34 S.D. 639, 150 N.W. 298 (1914); Prudential Ins. Co. v. Bull Market, Inc., 66 Ohio Mise. 9, 420 N.E.2d 140 (1979). Therefore, the trial court finding of fraud was not even necessary to the decision and eviction was proper. SDCL 21-16-1(5). Michael Reynolds’ remedy is against his lessor, Agri-Business, *131for breach of lease, SDCL 43-32-6, and not against the owner, Andrews.