Legal Opinion

Hawthorne v. Odenson

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided April 10, 1923PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Leaming, V. C.

The bill seeks foreclosure of a purchase-money mortgage. The deed of conveyance from complainant to defendant contains no covenant except that which is commonly known as a covenant of special warranty, that is, a covenant to defend against persons claiming under the vendor. Defendant claims a failure of title as to an essential part of the premises by a title paramount which does not fall within the covenants of the deed of conveyance. Also a failure of title of the entire premises by act of complainant falling within the covenant. Also certain fraudulent conduct on the part of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Andrus v. St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Inhabitants of Barkhamsted v. CaseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
  3. McDonough & Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Sorensen v. LarueIdaho Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Curtiss-Warner Corp. v. ThirkettleNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
  3. Emery v. HansenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
  4. Freedman v. Kensico Realty Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
  5. Kentucky River Coal Corp. v. Swift Coal & Timber Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1927

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API