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
245
Where a building was rented for the purpose of being conducted as a motion picture theatre, the landlord could not be held to have covenanted to have allowed the lessee an exit from the rear through property owned by the landlord where such property was not included in the lease.55
It is not always an easy matter to determine whether the contract between the parties is a lease or a license. In a late case the question was fully discussed,56 but the agreement there construed was rather unusual. In Leavitt v. Windsor Co.,57 it was held that where in addition
his part of the contract, and so could not obtain relief in equity.
65 Kaiser v. Cinberg (1909), 130 A. D. (N. Y.) 254; 114 N. Y. Supp. 716.
As to the liability of the owner of a theatre for repairs made therein under direction of the lessee, see Valenti v. N. Y. Theatre Co. (1917), N. Y. Law Journal, April 6th.
66 Coney Island Co. v. M’lntyrePaxton Co. (1912), 200. Fed. (C. C. A.) 901. An agreement made for the use of an amusement park construed, and its tenure defined.
Whether the rights of a concessionaire amounted to a license revocable at will of owner, quaere.
67 Leavitt v. Windsor Land & Investment Co. (1893), 54 Fed. (C. C. A.) 439. Where contract
provides that defendant furnish building and pay certain of its expenses and the plaintiff give his time and skill in carrying on a theatre therein and to act as manager of such theatre, the defendant to receive a fixed sum as rent and in addition thereto one-half of the net profits; the contract also providing that the losses be borne equally by the parties it was held that a partnership had been created though the parties had referred to themselves as lessee and lessor. See also Section 62.
On the question of the dissolution of such joint venture see: Shubert v. Laughlin (1907), 107 N. Y. Supp. 708. Plaintiff contributed his theatre lease and defendant his skill as a manager and booking-agent in a joint