This is a tricky situation. Here is a summary of the events that lead to the question at hand, what are Kwik’s rights?
Alfred Ohner and Ted Kwik had been friends for a number of years, both lives in Denver, Colorado. In October 1997, Ohner finished construction of a new 100-unit apartment house in Denver called The Crescent. Ohner and Kwik then entered into a written contract under which Kwik rented The Crescent from Ohner for 10 years, beginning in January 1, 1998. The parties contemplated that Kwik would take on management of The Crescent as his full-time business, and would pay all operating expenses, making a profit on the difference between rentals and expenses.
A year later Kwik started to lose money and Ohner lower what he was charging him at the time for he could make a profit. In July 2000, Ohner and Kwik had a falling-out over a game of bridge. Kwik accused Ohner of cheating. Ohner told him to take the words back, but Kwik refused. Ohner then said, “That’s it for us; our friendship is over. What I did for you on The Crescent if off. From now on, you pay me the regular rent.”
Now Kwik’s rights are that it was a written document which by terms is legal contract. Just because of a falling out with one other don’t mean that the contract is void. Personal matters don’t translate to legal matters. The contract says that Kwik would take on management of The Crescent as his full time business. It also states that Kwik would rent The Crescent for ten years beginning in January 1, 1998. July 2000 was the falling out and as of that date Kwik still has eight years remaining on his ten year contract.