Court Opinion

ID: 9559150
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:23:25.964909+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:51.623137
License: Public Domain

EDMONDS, J.
I concur in the judgment but do not join in the statement that “the lessor could not relieve itself of a duty imposed by law by making an agreement with the lessee whereby it waived its right to enter the premises for the purpose of performing that duty.” Unquestionably the agreement made by the parties on December 16th was a new lease; therefore the question as to the liability of a lessor who con*457tracts prior to the date of expiration of a lease for an extension of its term is not reached in the present case. It may be noted, however, that the authorities have recognized a clear distinction between the extension and the renewal of a lease (Howell v. City of Hamburg Co., 165 Cal. 172 [131 P. 130]; Braun v. Leo G. McLaughlin Co., 93 Cal.App. 116 [269 P. 191]; Lang v. Pacific Brewing etc. Co., 44 Cal.App. 618 [187 P. 81]; Robertson v. Drew, 34 Cal.App. 143 [166 P. 838]).