Beal v. Dill

The opinion of the court was delivered by Plaintiffs brought this action for a decree holding invalid the
provisions of a written lease for an extension of the term of the
lease after the first year and praying for the cancellation of
the lease and possession of the premises. Defendant filed an
answer to the petition and also filed a cross petition seeking
specific performance. The trial court held that the provision in
the lease granting to the lessee an option to extend the lease
beyond the primary term was void for the reason that it was too
indefinite with respect to the amount of rental to be paid for
the extended term. The court also denied defendant's cross
petition for specific performance. From these orders defendant
has appealed. The court also denied judgment for plaintiffs
cancelling the lease and for possession of the property, and from
those rulings the plaintiffs have cross-appealed. The facts are not in controversy. On May 24, 1950, plaintiffs,
as lessors, executed a lease to defendant for a described room in
a
[173 Kan. 880]