"The general rule has been stated that in the absence of a lease provision to the contrary, a tenant is not relieved from the obligation to pay rent despite the total destruction of the leased premises. Magaw v. Lambert, 3 Pa. 444 (1846); Hoy v. Holt,91 Pa. 88(1879). Manderino, J. in Albert M. Greenfield & Co. V. Kolea, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1976, 475 Pa. 351 , 380 A.2d 758 .

The judge goes on to argue that "The presumption established in Magaw and Hoy, supra, no longer has relevance to today's landlord-tenant relationships," and thus that the old common law rule should be abandoned.

See also Crow Lumber & Bldg. Materials Co. v. Washington County Library Bd., 428 S.W.2d 759 (Mo. App. 1968), which discusses the common law rule, its exceptions, and legislative abrogation of the rule in some states.