Editing Ernst v. Conditt

{{Infobox Case Brief
|court=Tennessee Court of Appeal
|citation=390 S.W.2d 703
|date=May 3, 1965
|subject=Property
|facts=*Ernst = a couple who, in June 1960, leased a land in Davidson County, Tennessee to Mr. Rogers for 1 year = landlord
*Rogers = a tenant = a builder of a go-kart track on his leased land
*Ernest & Rogers extended the lease to 2 years
*Rogers [https://www.quimbee.com/keyterms/sublet sub-leases] (sub-let) the premises to Conditt
*Conditt paid rent for 3 months but then stopped paying
*Conditt kept possession of the premises for the remainder of the lease while paying rent only 1 more time
*
|procedural_history=* Ernst sued Conditt for not paying rent while in possession of the property.
* Ernst sued Conditt in the Chancery Court in Tennesssee.
* Conditt lost.
|arguments=Conditt argued that his contract was with Rogers (the primary tenant) as opposed to the Ernst (the landlord).
|holding=Yes; a 3rd party, who receives leased premises from a tenant, can be held responsible for the tenant's lease obligations.
|judgment=Affirmed
|reasons=Judge Chattin: The sub-lease between Rogers & Conditt constituted an [https://www.quimbee.com/keyterms/assignment assignment] of Roger's rights under the original lease. Conditt was liable to the landlords for the rent pursuant to the lease.

Even though Rogers & Conditt labeled their contract a "sub-let," their contract was really for an assignment for the lease. Conditt was the person occupying the premises for the full duration of the original lease term.
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/ernst-v-conditt
|source_type=Video summary
|case_text_source=Quimbee
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://law.justia.com/cases/tennessee/court-of-appeals/1964/390-s-w-2d-703-1.html
|case_text_source=Justia
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://casetext.com/case/ernst-v-conditt
|case_text_source=CaseText
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://courtroomcast.lexisnexis.com/acf_cases/9462-ernst-v-conditt
|case_text_source=Lexis Nexis
}}
|case_videos={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Video
|service=YouTube
|id=5VbC35aUH_0
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Video
|service=YouTube
|id=xEEGS9v3264
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Video
|service=YouTube
|id=qoBSGKz7W1U
}}
}}