145 Notice by a lessor will enure to the benefit of his assignee. Glenn v. Thompson, 75 Penn. St 389. Payment of rent in advance does not dispense with notice. Sprague v. Quinn, 108 Mass 553 If a tenant holds over, no notice is necessary, Knecht v. Mitchell, 67 Ill. 86; unless so long continued that the landlord's assent will be presumed, Smith v. Littlefield, 51 N. Y. 539; nor where a tenant is to remain only while in the landlord's employ, Grosvenor v. Henry, 27 Ia. 269; or on condition of running a saw-mill which he abandons, Crawley v. Mullins, 48 Mo. 517; or his term is to end on notice of a sale, Miller v. Levi, 44 N. Y. 489; or " if he suited the landlord," Whetstone v. Davis, 34 Ind. 510; or as long as the tenant pays rent and the landlord can let, Wood v. Beard, 2 Ex. D. 30. But if the act or condition is within the landlord's control, the tenant must have reasonable notice. Shaw v. Hoffman, 25 Mich 162. Notice by an unauthorized agent cannot be ratified after the proper time has expired. Brahn v Jersey City, etc. Co., 9 Vroom, 74. A notice from one to whom lessor agrees to convey is not good. Reeder v. Sayre, 70 N. Y. 180. An error in the address does not vitiate, if it is received by the one intended, Clark v. Keliher, 107 Mass. 406; as to a married woman as " Mr C," Cook v. Creswell, 44 Md. 581. Defects in a notice may be waived by the party receiving it. Boynton v. Bodwell, 113 Mass. 531. The owner of land, who forcibly enters thereon and ejects without unnecessary force a tenant at sufferance, who has had reasonable notice to quit, is not liable to an action for an assault. Low v. Elwell, 121 Mass 309, where Gray, C. J., elaborately reviews all the authorities. - K.

1 In England, such a notice must run from one quarterly feast day to the next, though more or less than six months, Morgan v Davies, 3 C. P. D. 260; but the parties may agree on any period, as one week, Cornish v. Stubbs, L. R 5 C. P. 334. - K.

* A notice to quit is necessary in all those cases in which the implication of law creates a tenancy from year to year, or one determinable by the landlord. (z) But a notice to quit is not necessary where the relation of landlord and tenant does not subsist,(a) or where the tenant distinctly disclaims the title of his landlord. (b)

As the tenant is to act upon the notice when he receives it, it should be such a notice as he may act upon safely; and therefore it must be one which is binding upon all parties concerned at the time it is given, and needs no recognition by any one of them subsequently; (c) nor will such recognition make it sufficient. (d) But a notice by one joint-tenant for himself and the others is sufficient; (e) and so is a notice by one copartner for the firm. (f)

No particular form of the notice is necessary; but there must be a reasonable certainty in the description of the premises; and we think there should be a reasonably certain statement of the time when the tenant must quit; but this has been denied in New York. (f) It seems that the notice need state no reason for terminating the tenancy. (fg) The notice may be oral, unless there be an express agreement that it should be in writing. (g) It should be served upon the tenant personally, or by leaving it with the tenant's wife, or servant, at * the usual place of abode of the tenant; (h) and if so left it is sufficient, although it never reach the tenant. (?) If there is more than one tenant, the notice should be addressed to all, but it may be served on either one. (j)

(z) Doe v. Watts, 2 Esp 501; s. c. 7 T. R. 83; Denn v. Rawlins, 10 East (Day's ed.), 261, n. 2.

(a) Right v. Bawden, 3 East, 260; Roe v. Prideaux, 10 East, 158. Therefore, if a man gets into possession of a house to be let, without the privity of the landlord, and they afterwards enter into a negotiation for a lease, but differ upon the terms, the landlord may maintain ejectment to recover possession of the premises without giving any notice to quit, Doe v Quigley, 2 Camp. 505. So a member of a firm, occupying a house of one of his copartners during the partnership, is not entitled to notice at its close. Waithman v. Miles, 1 Stark. 181. So of a vendee in possession, who has not paid the price, nor been recognized as a tenant. Doe v. Lawder, 1 Stark. 308; Doe v. Sayer, 3 Camp. 8. See also Doe v. Chamherlaine, 5 M. & W. 14.

(b) Doe v. Evans, 9 M. & W. 48. Doe v. Pasquali, Peake, Cas. 196; Bower v.

Major, 1 Br. & B. 4; Doe v. Frowd, 4 Bing. 557; Doe v. Rollings, 4 C. B. 188; Doe v. Clarke, Peake, Ad. Cas. 239.

(c) Doer. Cuthell, 5 East, 491; Doe v. Goldwin, 2 Q. B. 143. And see Currier v. Barker. 2 Gray, 224; Steward v. Harding, id. 335.

(d) Parke, B., in Buron v Denman, 2 Exch, 167, 188; Doe v. Goldwin, supra; Doe v. Walters, 10 B. & C. 626.

(e) Doe v. Summersett, l B. & Ad 135; Doe v. Hughes, 7 M. & W. 139.

(f) Doe v. Hulme. 2 Man. & R. 483

(ff) Burns v. Bryant, 31 N Y. 45a (fg) Russell v. Allard, 18 N. H. 222. (g) Doe v. Crick, 5 Esp. 196; Doe v,

Pierce, 2 Camp. 96; Legg v. Benion,

Willes, 43.

(h) Jones v. Marsh, 2 T. R. 404, Doe v Lucas, 5 Esp. 183.

(i) Doe v. Dunbar, Mood. & M. 10.

(j) Doe v. Wat kins, 7 East, 551; Doe v Crick, 5 Esp. 196.

A valid notice, properly served, vests the premises in the landlord, and absolutely terminates the tenant's right of possession at the time stated. (k)1 But this and all other effects of the notice may be waived by the landlord, and is so waived by his receiving subsequent rent from the tenant. (I)