Editing Hannan v. Dusch

{{Infobox Case Brief
|court=Virginia Supreme Court
|citation=153 S.E. 824
|date=1930
|subject=Property
|facts=* The '''Plaintiff''', Mr. Hannan, entered into a lease agreement with the '''Defendant''', Mr. Dusch, for a term of '''15 years'''.
* When Mr. Hannan attempted to take possession of the property, he discovered that there were still '''tenants occupying the premises'''.
* Despite this, Mr. Dusch '''refused to evict the former tenants''' and argued that it was Mr. Hannan’s responsibility to ensure that the property was available for possession.
|issues=* The central question was whether a landlord, in the absence of an '''express covenant''', is legally obligated to deliver possession of the property to the lessee.
|holding=* The court '''affirmed''' the lower court’s decision in favor of Mr. Dusch.
* Under the '''American rule''', absent an explicit covenant, the lessor has '''no duty to deliver possession''' of the property.
* While there may be an '''ethical duty''' for the lessor to oust old tenants, the statutory remedy for eviction rested on the lessee.
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/hannan-v-dusch
|source_type=Video summary
|case_text_source=Quimbee
}}
}}