Slater v. Pearle Vision Center, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1988.

376 Pa.Super. 580, 546 A.2d 676.

Johnson, pp. 316-320

 

Facts: Pearle signed a commercial lease to open a vision center in the plaintiffs’ shopping mall.  Pearle paid the rent, but never moved into the storefront.  The shopping mall owners sue because they feel that having an empty storefront hurts business in their mall overall.  They claim that the lease contains a requirement that Pearle actually take possession of the premises.  Pearle demurred, and the trial court found for Pearle.  The plaintiffs appeal.

 

Issue: Does the lease imply a duty by Pearle to not just pay the rent, but actually run a store in the mall?

 

Rule:

 

Analysis:

 

Conclusion: The trial court’s decision is overturned and the suit is reinstated.

 

Back to Regulated Relationship

Back to Casebook Notes