Administrators of Backus v. McCoy
Ohio Supreme Court
This cause was adjourned for decision here by the Supreme Court, sitting in Franklin-county, and came up for decision upon ■the cause of action set out in the declaration. It was an action of covenant, and the breach alleged in the declaration was that of the covenant of seizin, without alleging any eviction, or specifying any damage sustained by the intestate, in consequence of the alleged defect of title.
Read the full summary
This cause was adjourned for decision here by the Supreme Court, sitting in Franklin-county, and came up for decision upon ■the cause of action set out in the declaration. It was an action of covenant, and the breach alleged in the declaration was that of the covenant of seizin, without alleging any eviction, or specifying any damage sustained by the intestate, in consequence of the alleged defect of title. The defendant pleaded in bar that the premises in question were seized and sold in execution, on a judgment against the intestate in his lifetime, and conveyed by sheriff’s deed to the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court, by
Judge Sherman:
This action being brought to recover damages for a breach of the covenant of seizin, in a deed from the defendant, McCoy, to the plaintiff’s intestate, the counsel have not confined themselves to the question necessarily growing out of the demurrer, but have argued the general questions of when, under what circumstances, and' to what extent the grantor, in a deed, is liable under the •covenant of seizin. This covenant is one of very general use in conveyances of land, in this state, and it is important that all persons should understand its nature; the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Marston v. HobbsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Hamilton v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1809
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bolton v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- Gardner v. LetsonHardin County Court of Common Pleas · 1897
- McAlpin v. WoodruffOhio Supreme Court · 1860