Slater v. Pearle Vision
Center, Inc.
Superior
Court of
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.