
    VAN DE WALKER v. McMICHAEL.
    Landlord and Tenant — Breach op Lease.
    In action for amount claimed to be due under lease of three- ' story building, where lessee moved out because he was prevented by city authorities from using third story because of lessor’s failure to furnish fire escapes as required by statute, lessor is entitled to recover only reasonable rental value of that part of premises occupied by lessee for period of occupancy.
    As to effect of lack of fire escapes on liability of tenant for rent, see annotation in 39 L. R, A. (N. S.) 894,
    Error to Washtenaw; Sample (George W.), J.
    Submitted October 10, 1929.
    (Docket No. 55, Calendar No. 34,575.)
    Decided March 6, 1930.
    Assumpsit by H. E. Van de Walker against William McMichael for amount claimed due under a lease. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
    Reversed, and new trial granted.
    
      Herbert D. Wither ell and Lee N. Brown, for plaintiff.
    
      Carl A. Lehman, for defendant.
   Potter, J.

Plaintiff sued defendant for the rent of a three-story building in Tpsilanti leased for restaurant, rooming,- and recreation purposes. There was judgment for plaintiff for the full amount of the rent, according to the terms of the lease, and defendant brings error. By reason of plaintiff’s failure to put fire escapes on the building as required by statute, defendant was prevented by the city authorities from using the third story of the building for the purposes for which it was leased, and moved out. Under the facts, as presented by counsel, plaintiff was entitled to recover only the reasonable rental value of that part of the premises occupied by defendant for the period of his occupancy. Judgment reversed, with costs, and a new trial granted. .

Wiest, C. J., and Bittzel, Clark, McDonald, Sharpe, Fead, and North, JJ., concurred.  