Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 441
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 441.050 (2026)

Tenancy from year to year, how terminated

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  441.050.  Tenancy from year to year, how terminated. — Either party may terminate a tenancy from year to year by giving notice, in writing, of his intention to terminate the same, not less than sixty days next before the end of the year.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 2969)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 2583; 1919 § 6879; 1909 § 7882

CROSS REFERENCE:

Service of notice, generally, 1.190

(1957) Fact that tenant held over eleven days after expiration of written lease did not of itself create a new tenancy from year to year, and tenant had no interest in premises condemned under action filed on 12th day. Millhouse v. Drainage Dist. No. 48 of Dunklin Co. (A.), 304 S.W.2d 54.

(1964) Trial court reasonably have found that oral agreement between plaintiff and defendant that plaintiff would get one-third of crops and pay one-third of combining and fertilizing, where no fixed rental was agreed upon and defendant did not even pay rent in cash, no discussion was had as to length of term, defendant furnished his own seed and decided what crops to plant and used his own equipment, did not constitute a tenancy from year to year and therefore defendant was not entitled to sixty days' notice. Smith v. McNew (A.), 381 S.W.2d 369.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1957–2024 · leading case: Robin Farms, Inc. v. Bartholome, 989 S.W.2d 238 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Robin Farms, Inc. v. Bartholome, 989 S.W.2d 238 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 5× “Specifically, the appellants claim that there was a factual dispute as to this issue because the respondents were required, but failed, to give Robin Farms statutory notice, under § 441.050, of their intent to terminate its alleged year-to-year tenancy.”
Busby v. Stimpson, 542 S.W.2d 551 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 7× “First, plaintiff argues that the deed from the defendant Ruth Stimpson to her four children is invalid because of a failure of delivery and, second, that since she was the owner, his oral arrangement with her for a three-year lease, which the parties concede would be invalid…”
Jansen v. Pobst, 922 S.W.2d 43 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 7× “This case involves a dispute over the validity of a farm lease and the sufficiency of a notice under § 441.050 1 to terminate a year-to-year tenancy.”
Millhouse v. Drainage Dist. No. 48 of Dunklin Cnty., 304 S.W.2d 54 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957). · cites it 3× “Section 441.050 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.; see 51 O.”
Watkins v. Wattle, 558 S.W.2d 705 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 3× “In all cases of an oral letting or leasing of real property for any agricultural year, tenancy at will or by sufferance, or for less than one year, if either party shall terminate said tenancy in accordance with the provisions of sections 441.050 and 441.-060, in any suit…”
Smith v. McNew, 381 S.W.2d 369 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964). · cites it 4× “169 , among others, the appellant contends that he was a tenant from year to year, entitled to sixty days’ written notice to quit, as provided in Section 441.050. The-respondent, largely upon the basis of a single periodical discussion of the subject, 2 maintains that, in light…”
Morris v. Pike, 545 S.W.2d 410 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 3× “2d, Landlord and Tenant, Sections 65, 69, 70, 73; Section 441.050, RSMo 1969. Judgment affirmed.”
AGRIBANK FCB v. Cross Timbers Ranch, Inc., 919 S.W.2d 256 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996). “” Cross Timbers asserted that since it was lawfully in possession of the property a tenancy at will had been created and that unlawful detainer would not lie to oust it from the land because it had not been given the requisite 60 days to vacate as directed by § 441.050. 2…”
Kiefer v. First Capitol Sports Ctr., Inc., 684 S.W.2d 483 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984). “, to terminate tenancy under §§ 441.050 and 534.030, in an action for unlawful detainer was valid.”
In Re Hettinger, 95 B.R. 110 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 1989). “§ 441.050 (Vernon 1986); and thus, Jerry Schultz was able to retain the premises.”
McNeill v. McNeill, 456 S.W.2d 800 (Mo. Ct. App. 1970). “423, 425 (4)] which may be terminated only by giving written notice to quit at least sixty days before the end of the term [§ 441.050; Fisher v. Lape, Mo.App., 176 S.”
Derek Fuemmeler v. Mike & Mark Farms, LLC, 703 S.W.3d 249 (Mo. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 12× “14 The undisputed facts establish that Defendant[ 15] is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law under the Missouri Statute of Frauds, as the contracts at issue are nothing more than oral year to year farm leases that can be terminated by giving sixty (60) days’ notice…”
Show all 16 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.