Ask Question

A landlord brought suit against a tenant in federal court for overdue rent payments on a commercial lease. The landlord sought to recover on the six rent installments that were past due and unpaid at the time of the suit. The landlord won the case, and judgment was entered in her favor. The lease has an acceleration clause that states that all future rent payments become due if the tenant falls behind three months or more. The landlord now files suit against the tenant for the remaining rent payments. The tenant moves to dismiss, asserting that the landlord's claim is barred by claim preclusion (res judicata) principles. Should the tenant's motion to dismiss be granted?

+3
Answers (1)
  1. 23 June, 00:29
    0
    Yes, because the two suits arose out of the same transaction or occurrence.
Know the Answer?
Not Sure About the Answer?
Find an answer to your question 👍 “A landlord brought suit against a tenant in federal court for overdue rent payments on a commercial lease. The landlord sought to recover ...” in 📗 Social Studies if the answers seem to be not correct or there’s no answer. Try a smart search to find answers to similar questions.
Search for Other Answers