Majority
Headnote
Summary proceedings — sufficiency of the petition — they may he instituted against an under tenant.I think the petition was sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the justice to issue a precept. It set forth that the plaintiff was the owner of the premises described therein ; that on or about September 3, 1893, they were rented to the Peckamose Pishing Club for one year from that date, and that defendant was in possession as an under tenant of such club, and held over after the expiration of the term without the permission of plaintiff.
The defendant, in his answer, alleged that he was in possession of said premises under a valid and subsisting lease, which had not expired. On the trial no objection was made by him to the sufficiency of the petition, and he made no motion for the dismissal of the proceedings when the plaintiff rested. The issues formed by the petition and answer were submitted to the jury without objection.
We conclude, therefore, that the petition was sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the justice. Under the provisions of section 2231 of the Code of Civil Procedure summary proceedings may be instituted against an under tenant, and the evidence was sufficient to show that defendant was in occupancy of the premises as an under tenant of the lessee. The testimony on the trial presented a question of fact which was properly submitted to the jury, the defendant making no objection to such submission.
The plaintiff testified positively to a lease for one year, which expired on September 3, 1894, and that such lease had not been renewed, and if the letters and receipt read by defendant had some tendency to contradict this evidence, such letters and receipt were not so conclusive as to authorize the justice to withdraw the case from the jury, especially as the defendant, when sworn as a witness* did not controvert the statement of the plaintiff.
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
TVIayham, P. J., and Herrick, J., concurred.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.'