*1 procedure; simply regulate These rules rights. We
they do not create substantive corresponding Federal examined the
have them, construing and numerous cases
Rules find no which would plaintiffs standing
confer
sue.
Finally, representing appel counsel forcefully very argues,
lants in brief and Court, justice
at the bar
their claim. fact that these citizens
in their insistence that mandatory2 T.C.A. are
must be followed does not alter situa record, appellants simply
tion. Under this the standing
do to sue.
The judgment of trial court is af-
firmed, ques- but only to the extent of the
tion of standing.
All the costs of this cause both in the
trial against court and on
Dyer County. INC., MOTORS,
BOB PEARSALL INC., CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH,
REGAL Appellee.
Supreme Court of Tennessee. 3, 1975. April 14,
Rehearing Denied holding Henegar, unmindful of the 2.We County, this Court Brooks v. Claiborne (1874) ex rel. Wolfe State *2 Tune, Butler, Entrekin, LESSEE, Tune & IN ADDITION THE TO John Nashville, appellant. OUT, RENTAL HEREINABOVE SET PAY AGREES TO ANY INCREASE Roberts, Parker, L. Nichols & James IN PROPERTY TAXES OVER Roberts, Nashville, appellee. PAID THOSE BY LESSORS FOR THE YEAR whether caused creased assessment or rate. OPINION significance We attach no change HENRY, Justice. quotation, of case in this uppercase It, or full caps doubt, to lowercase. no This suit declaratory for a judgment, bywas reproduced inadvertence and we it pursuant brought seq., appears as it on the lease in the inter- T.C.A., seeks a rights declaration of the accuracy. est of the agreement. under a sublease Motors, appeals Pearsall Inc. contract contains the The remainder from a Regal Chrys- favor of controversy. this significance to nothing of ler-Plymouth, Inc. lease, allegations the according to
This May into on entered Complaint, the was I. however, shows 24, 1963; copy the exhibit March date to 'been the correct dealer- operated an automobile Pearsall as- proceed upon the The briefs 1971. real ship separate four tracts of located on is sumption this latter date correct primary on each of which it held estate appears to we, precise date since the so do sublease One such lease. significance. be of no this property form the basis of action. Simultaneously (assuming lease, covering term of entered primary Pearsall date),
This to be the months, sixty-two following agreement Regal. contains sublease into a leasing provision, following a conventional the date of the that document Again April clause: to be lease shown significance; be of no agrees clarity we note however, interest of in the $27,900.00 monthly rent and to primary lease dealing with a arewe equal (Empha- installments . dates aforesaid into on one of the entered added) sis Realty Phil Cohen Pearsall and through Lee Coh- Company, acting Gilbert It should be noted that this lease was Feldman, covering en, agent for Ned prepared Immediately printed on a form. at 601 5th Avenue premises located following pro- the recitation of rental and Avenue, in Nashville. and 505 Lea South visions is recited payment, it “(t)his subject made reads, in 2 of the sublease Paragraph covenants, express stipula- following part, as follows: Among tions and conditions.” requirements that the lessee: in the shall Pearsall rental $3,200.00per month calendar amount of good repair. Maintain said (Empha- during term of this lease. Pay all water taxes during assessed supplied) sis period of the lease. By provided: paragraph 4 it is Immediately following cove- nants, stipulations conditions, ap- Regal hereby assumes, there during the term pears following typewritten sublease, of this provision: leases, courts, course,
tions to the Lessors under preclud except (Emphasis rent. creating ed from contract for supplied). parties. Gentry, Dubois v. Pearsall contends that under the sublease Various
agreement definitions of became of Re- *3 urged upon gal pay According us. to pay Black’s to rent but also to Edition, Dictionary, Law Revised Fourth in resulting taxes is payment periodically rent received increased rate. assessment or property. the use of Taxes have been de- Regal provision insists that the price fined pay as the we for civilization. by the payment of taxes to the We think definitions importance. are of no ad- to a which merely device lessee was taxes; however, Rent is rent and taxes are “rent” word that the just the rent and may may twain meet payments and tax Therefore, payment of taxes. cludes treated as part be of the rental if the 2 paragraph Regal’s position is that under agree. so its entire agreement, of the sublease Petty tion, principles. most excel- legal have submitted with Able counsel consistent Sloan, materially 355 aided the 277 lent briefs v. S.W.2d understanding and responsibility of Pearsall. general is the in a crease sole Court presented, but not- analysis problem of held that distinguished The Chancellor diligence and our own withstanding their pay any increase “obligation to Pearsall’s applica- independent investigation into the measur- was a means of taxes in precise- case law no Tennessee ble addition- obligation pay to ing the Lessee’s point. inly assumption of rent,” Regal’s al United States reasoning of the The paragraph 4 of under obligation Circuit, in Eighth Appeals for the Court “did include the sublease Neiman, 77 F.2d Mott Estate v. Lamoine taxes, in any increase to 1097,is most 744, (8th 99 ALR 1935), Cir. set out of the rent as being same ait had before persuasive. There court above.” strikingly provisions which contained here under consideration. to those
similar II. to rent in The lessee covenanted ensuing para- The amount. fixed annual interpretation cardinal rule part : provided, pertinent in graph intention ascertain contracts is to inten instances, give effect parties and to addi- The lessee shall all Petty principles. tion, rental, legal with all tax- consistent stipulated tion to said 355 277 S.W.2d Sloan, 197 Tenn. v. es (1955). did not holding that the taxes, the said: Court include enforce duty to Court’s It gener- compelled follow feel (W)e plain terms. according their contracts Co., is a clear distinction al rule that there Life Ins. Eleogrammenos v. Standard rent in common taxes and (1941). 69 may not usage, the term “rent” and that Further, must be taken used “in taxes include be construed ordinary so plain, in its and understood of the intention of a clear the absence popular Life Ins. Co. sense. Guardian expressed in the parties to that effect Richardson, Tenn.App. lease.” Here find no such clear inten Pearsall-Regal tion. clause in the Hampton MARTIN, Appellant, Anita lease reads “in addition rental here- set out." In Lamoine Mott
inabove Appellees. al., Attie Horne TAYLOR stipulated “in addition to rental.” reads legal find identical in We these clauses Supreme Tennessee. effect. provision in the sublease from Pear- respect sall to precisely taxes prior
category as requiring section the lease *4 maintain the water does not contain
taxes. The form
any the payment reference to It is desired obvious that
taxes. supply Their in so this omission. action
doing resulted the insertion of
wholly inconsistent with the view taxes were a of the rental.
III. therefore,
We, hold that under the sub- agreement Regal obligated bound and
itself to assume and all of Pearsall’s
obligations under the ex- rent,
cluding including but year taxes over those for the arising from an increase in the as-
sessment or rate. of the Chancellor is re-
versed. Costs
against appellee.
OPINION ON PETITION
TO REHEAR petition to rehear was not timely
filed under Rule 32 of this nor does any contain argument new or cite required by said Rule. petition accordingly overruled.