R.A. Beaufort & Sons, Inc. v. Trivisonno, 403 A.2d 664 (1979)

Citation: R.A. Beaufort & Sons, Inc. v. Trivisonno, 403 A.2d 664 (1979)
Parent Document: R.A. Beaufort & Sons, Inc. v. Trivisonno, 403 A.2d 664 (1979)
Jurisdiction: Rhode Island (state)
Effective Date: 1979-07-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2054698/ra-beaufort-sons-inc-v-trivisonno/ ↗

Full Text

1,437 chars

Earlier, we noted the preoccupancy payment of $1,000. The form lists the components of this payment as being the “Security Deposit,” “One Full Month’s Rent,” and the “Balance of First Month’s Rent (pro-rate).” Whoever filled in the form struck out any reference to prorating the first month’s rent, and thus a full first month’s rent was paid by the tenants. Patricia testified that she was not sure when April’s rent was due because the first month’s rent covered a period ending on April 9. Raymond acknowledged that Patricia and her spouse were not bound by the first-of-the-month proviso and said that April’s rent was due on the tenth day of the month. Patricia insisted that after talking to the landlord’s agent, she had mailed the April rent to Raymond at his residence. According to Patricia, the rent was in the form of a postal money order and wat mailed on April 15. Two weeks later the letter was supposedly returned to her by postal authorities for lack of a proper address. Raymond took strong issue with Patricia’s testimony concerning the mailing, but he did acknowledge that Patricia had come to his home and tendered the rent. The tender, he said, took place in May, but he refused it on the basis of the pending suit. The premises were vacated in mid-June, and the tenants moved to another home, which they had purchased with the financial help of a relative. Raymond reported that sometime in early or mid-Novem *840

Other Sections in This Document (37)

Full Text