Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Abernathy v. Adous Case Brief

Court of Appeals of Arkansas2004Docket #1717297
149 S.W.3d 884 85 Ark. App. 242 2004 Ark. App. LEXIS 167 Property Contracts

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A subtenant whose landlord defaulted on the primary lease was found to have no right to remain on the property. The court held the agreement was a sublease, not an assignment, meaning the subtenant’s rights were extinguished when the primary lease was terminated.

Legal Significance: This case reinforces the Arkansas rule that the parties’ intent, not the common-law “entire term” test, determines whether a lease transfer is an assignment or a sublease. It also affirms that a sublessee’s rights are derivative and terminate upon the prime lessee’s default.

Abernathy v. Adous Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Appellants Abernathy (lessor) leased a commercial property to Griffith Petroleum, Inc. (GPI) under a master lease that was silent on subleasing or assignment. GPI subsequently executed an agreement with appellee Adous, transferring possession of the property. This agreement was titled a “Sublease Agreement,” required Adous to pay rent to GPI (not Abernathy), and gave GPI a right of reentry upon Adous’s default. However, the agreement transferred the property for nearly the entire remaining term of the master lease and required Adous to observe all terms of that original lease. After several years, GPI defaulted on the master lease by failing to pay rent and becoming insolvent. Abernathy terminated the master lease and sought possession from Adous. Adous, who had been paying rent faithfully to GPI and later attempted to pay Abernathy directly, argued that his agreement was effectively an assignment and that equity should prevent the forfeiture of his tenancy. The trial court agreed, finding Adous was an assignee and that forfeiture would be inequitable. Abernathy appealed.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a subtenant, whose agreement is deemed a sublease based on the parties’ intent, retain any right to possession after the primary tenant defaults and the landlord terminates the original lease?

No. The court reversed the trial court, holding that the agreement was Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in repr

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a subtenant, whose agreement is deemed a sublease based on the parties’ intent, retain any right to possession after the primary tenant defaults and the landlord terminates the original lease?

Conclusion

This case solidifies the "intent of the parties" test for distinguishing assignments Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris

Legal Rule

In Arkansas, the intention of the parties governs whether a lease transfer Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in v

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis centered on the distinction between a sublease and an Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in volu

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • In Arkansas, the intention of the parties, not the duration of
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui of

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Law school is a lot like juggling. With chainsaws. While on a unicycle.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+