ICSC Legal Database - Cases Monday, February 22, 1999 05:04 PM Case Index: 01121 Citation: Windsor Real Estate and Mortgage Co. v. Ruma, 710 S.W.2d 316 (Mo. 1986). Issue: Whether landlord's reletting of premises at a rate "readily obtainable," although greater than defaulting tenant was paying, necessarily implies acceptance of tenant's surrender. Facts: Thomas Ruma leased premises in a shopping center for a pizza parlor and commissary. After a fire rendered the premises "unfit for occupancy," Windsor (landlord) restored the premises, although, it did not replace Ruma's improvements. When Ruma refused to resume possession, Windsor solicited prospective tenants who were given the option of assuming Ruma's lease, subletting from Ruma, or entering into a new agreement at a higher rental rate. Ruma alleged that Windor's refusal to replace improvements terminated his obligations under the lease. Moreover, he asserted that Windsor impliedly accepted the surrender, by attempting to relet the premises for an increased rent,contrary to a provision in the lease permitting relet at "any rental readily obtainable." Windsor brought this action to recover rent for the ten months the premises had been vacant and the trial court found in favor of defendant on the ground that Windsor had impliedly accepted defendant's surrender of the premises by attempting to relet for a greater rent than was readily obtainable. Windsor appealed. On appeal, the court determined that Windsor's refusal to restore improvements did not relieve Ruma of his obligation to pay rent. However, the court remanded the case to establish whether the increased rate was "rental readily obtainable." On remand, the trial court determined that the higher rate was not "readily obtainable" within the meaning of the lease. Therefore, the court ruled that Ruma's obligations terminated when Windsor re-entered the premises. Windsor appealed. Holding: Affirmed in part, Reversed in part, and Remanded. Evidence of the options for reletting preclude an inference that landlord accepted tenant's surrender. If the lease grants a landlord the right to re-enter, the landlord's attempt to relet cannot, in and of itself, constitute acceptance of the tenant's surrender. Nor does a landlord's attempt to obtain a greater rent from a prospective tenant than that for which the defaulting tenant was obligated necessarily imply acceptance of the tenant's surrender. The decision was reversed and remanded with instructions that judgment be entered for the landlord, with interet and costs. The trial court's finding that the landlord converted personally the tenant had left on the premises was affirmed. Publication: Legal Update Date: Winter 1986 Classification 1: Landlord and Tenant Classification 2: Classification 3: 01121 - Legal Update - Winter 1986