
    Osgood against Dewey.
    4“ aoíó™uja! tí™ ioidíógeris aíweíi"s™Pexd Kofthliand-.
    a tenant who, after the expir ration of, and payment of rent under, a paroi demise, contmSon Without any “ft" ttTtaniS-1 aSactionagataS him for the use and" occupation subsh|quen“ls?<l of6 thePfo™™ th™raedi)SfPthte hisIDsubsequent holding Will be deemed to have been by the impiiedpCTmfeiop 'resaor.
    IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s,court,
    The defendant in error brought an action against .the plaintiff in, error, iA the court'below, for usé and •
    
      Dejpey,- the plaintiff below, demised, by'.parol, certain premises to the defendant below, for one -year,1 ending the 31st ctf J , y¿ ’■ December, 18Q9, at the . rent or 9 doUars¿, which, the defendant • : ■ >. . 1 V... \ paid, and continued in .possession for three years, without any b 7 ■ . A' # . <J .* ■ v agreement, and .without paying rent.- The', action was brought to recover rent for those, three years, and'judgment \vas given for the plaintiff below. '' ' ' ■ ,
   •Per Curiam.

Thére man be no doubt that this action libs as well where 'the 'holding is upon an implied as upon an express •permission of the landlord., The párbí lease for the-year 1809., and ,the payment of rent under it, are bets' which .estop í the tenant from disputing'the title oí . his landlord ; and, " although no new agreement was-shown,.in regard'to the tenancy for.tlie three last years, the continued possession of the tenant, holding over, is characterized by the previous léasej and must be deemed a holding by implied permission of the 'original lessor., (Harding v. Crethorn 1. Esp. Rep. 57.) The judgmeni must be affirmed..

Judgment affirmed.  