
    PALFREY vs. SCATES & BAGGETT.
    Eastern Dist.
    
      May, 1839
    APPEAL EltOM THE COURT OT? THE JTRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT, JUDGE BUCHANAN PRESIDING.
    In a contest about the occupation of leased premises, which is submitted to a jury, it is properly a question of fact, and the verdict being justified by the evidence, will not be disturbed, although against both parties.
    This is an action for rent. The plaintiff leased to the defendants one half of a ware-house, for a year, at twenty-five dollars per month, payable quarterly, dated 15th January, 1838. On the 23d of January, the plaintiff notified the defendants as follows : “ If you keep possession of the whole of my ware-house in Gravier street, longer than to-day, I shall charge you twenty-five dollars per month for this month, for the half you have lately taken possession of; and fifty dollars per month afterwards; making seventy-five for the whole ; or fifty dollars for the whole if you engage it for a year.”
    On the last of June following, the plaintiff made out his account for four hundred dollars rent, due on the conditions of his notification, and prayed judgment for this amount. The defendants pleaded a general denial.
    The case was submitted to a jury, who, on the evidence produced, returned a verdict of two hundred and twenty-five dollars for the plaintiff, and the defendants, after an unsuccessful attempt to obtain a new trial, appealed from the judgment. The plaintiff prayed to have the judgment amended in his favor.
    
      Lockett and Micou, for the plaintiff.
    
      McMillen and Chivot, contra.
   Rost, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an action to recover the rent due for the use of a ware-house, leased by the plaintiff to the defendants.

It appears by the lease, that the defendants rented one half of the ware-house, at twenty-five dollars per month. Subsequently, the plaintiff notified them in writing-, that if they occupied the whole of his ware-house longer than the day of the notice, he would charge them twenty-five dollars per month, for the half which they had lately taken possession of, and fifty dollars a month afterwards, making seventy-five dollars for the whole, or fifty dollars for the whole, if they took it by the year. The defendants continued under their lease, and the plaintiff claims rent from them, agreeably to his notice. The case was submitted to a jury, who being of opinion that the defendants had not occupied the whole ware-house, in such a manner as to make them liable for the rent claimed, gave a verdict for the rent due under the lease; and judgment having been rendered, the defendants appealed. The plaintiff has asked that the judgment be amended, so as to allow him the whole amount claimed in his petition. The question upon which the decision turned in the court below, was purely a question of fact; and the conclusion to which the jury came, appears to us fully justified by the evidence in the record.

It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed with costs.  