Court Opinion

ID: 8859158
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-26 17:42:02.407609+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:05:45.876396
License: Public Domain

SHOWALTER, Circuit Judge
(concurring). Randle sued Barnard and Ricksecker in assumpsit to recover a balance of rent reserved on a certain lease. Ricksecker was not served with process, and did not appear. The lease put in evidence was in the ordinary form, and was under seal. Randle was therein named as lessor, and Ricksecker as lessee. Barnard was not a party to the instrument. In law, the leasehold estate in its entirety was vested in Ricksecker. The court did not find that this leasehold estate, or any part of it, had ever been assigned to Barnard; nor is there any finding from which such assignment can be inferred. The matters put forward as indicating a partnership relation between Ricksecker and Barnard do not go to the extent of showing any alienation of the leasehold estate by the one to the other. Moreover, the lease itself provided in express terms against assignment. ' There was neither privity of estate nor privity of contract between Randle and Barnard, — nothing .whatever oil which to predicate, as between these two, the relation of landlord and tenant. I think, therefore, the judgment should be affirmed.