This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Petitioner (P) is the owner of a building which was rented to Respondent (R) under a written lease for use as an off-track betting parlor. R exercised its option to renew in 1979 and agreed to additional space. Shortly thereafter, P served notice of termination and began a summary proceedings alleging several violations of the lease. P got the judgment. The appeals court reversed; a summary proceeding would not lie for the alleged violations. P then appealed. P claimed that R made alterations to the premises without permission from P, failed to pay an agreed-upon increase in real estate taxes and allowed patrons and employees to park in fire lanes. Neither P's notice of termination nor petition makes reference to R's violation of paragraph one of the contract; failure to pay rent nor do they refer to paragraph 17 of the lease contract.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.