We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
THEATRE LEASES
239
In a later decision, however, it was held that a covenant to exhibit pictures for admission ranging from twentyfive cents to two dollars was not violated by charging only twenty-five cents to fifty cents.44
if so the present use of the theatre would seem to be a violation of the clause with reference to an increased hazard on account of fire.”
44 Goelet v. Frohman (1916), N. Y. Law Journal, Feb. 23. “Application pendente lite for injunction. The plaintiff, the owner of the Knickerbocker Theatre, seeks to enjoin the defendant from presenting in said theatre a continuous motion picture performance at admission prices 25 and 50 cents. They assert that such action on the part of defendants is a violation of the covenants of the lease of the theatre. It appears that the defendants Hayman, Klaw & Erlanger and Charles Frohman, Inc., are lessees from the plaintiff, and under their lease, entered into an agreement with the defendant Aitken, granting the use of the theatre to the defendants under certain restrictions. The following provisions are contained therein: ‘The parties of the first part let unto the party of the second part (Aitken) for
the purpose of exhibitions of first-class motion pictures only for a period of one year, commencing Sept. 1, 1915, and terminating August 31, 1916, the Knickerbocker Theatre. . . . The second party defendant (Aitken) agrees that said premises are to be used only for the exhibition of first-class motion pictures, and not otherwise, prices of admission to be and maintained at the same standard as that of other firstclass theatres on Broadway; evening prices to be 25 cents to $2.00. The second party (Aitken) agrees further to use said theatre as a theatre of the first class in the City of New York. . . . The party of the second part hires the said theatre subject to the lease of the parties of the first part with the owners of the said building. . . It is asserted that the defendant Aitken and the defendant Triangle Film Co. are violating this agreement by offering the theatre as a continuous moving picture house at the prices above stated, and presenting an addition to motion