Summary

Portrait of Samuel Freeman Miller Samuel Freeman Miller Kutter v. Smith — Opinion of the Court

But if we concede so singular a proposition as that the title to the soil was in defendant, while that of the building was in plaintiff, it by no means follows that defendant is bound to purchase plaintiff's building. The utmost that can be claimed on that subject is that Smith is bound by the covenant of Link, the lessor, to purchase at the end of ten years or renew the lease. He may always exercise his option in favor of the latter proposition, and by the contract may never be bound to purchase.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Samuel Freeman Miller Samuel Freeman Miller Kutter v. Smith — Opinion of the Court

The covenant for re-entry provides that, in default of payment of rent, the lessor may enter 'and the said premises repossess and enjoy, as in his first and former estate.'
The plaintiff insists that the building is no part of such former estate, and defendant, therefore, does not become its owner by virtue of the re-entry. We have already shown that the building does become a part of the land as it is built.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature