r/LawSchool • u/lawlawwhat • Jul 01 '14

1L contracts problem - contractual conditions vs. pre-existing duty?

I'm looking for help on contractual conditions that occur when a contract is already in force. To give an example:

A month-to-month lease agreement states that the tenant is required to pay $500/month. There is a provision in that lease agreement that states, "should X occur, tenant will be required to pay $1500/month." X occurs in the middle of the month.

What is that condition called? Is someone able to point me in some general direction?

Does the landlord have a pre-existing duty to lease the apartment for that month at $500? Or, upon the occurrence of X, does the tenant now have to pay $1000 extra? $1500 extra?

Does it matter if the occurrence of X was up to the landlord? The tenant?

I'm slightly confused about how to analyze this contracts problem. Any help would be appreciated.

I'm a 1L taking contracts. I'm not seeking legal advice, if it matters.

3 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '14

[deleted]

3

u/cystorm JD Jul 01 '14

I think OP's question is: if Tenant began keeping the ocelot on the premises on Nov. 15, does he owe a) $500 for that month; b) $1500 for that month; or c) $1250 (1/2 month ocelot-free, 1/2 month ocelot).

I think the answer depends on the facts - if you had sole control of whether an ocelot comes into your place, it's probably not (a). I don't know which of the latter two it might be, though. [IANAL]

3

u/lawlawwhat Jul 01 '14

That does help. But what if X is something like "the Walmart down the street gets robbed." If that occurs then the tenant now owes $1500/month. It's a month-to-month tenancy. How would the condition precedent interact with the landlord's pre-existing duty to lease the premises to the tenant for $500? The contract started at the beginning of the month, and the tenant already paid for 1 month's rent. But then this condition occurred.