Trustees of Section No. 16 v. Spencer
Ohio Supreme Court
This was action of covenant upon a lease executed under seal-by David Funk and two other trustees, etc., to the defendant,, ■dated May 27, 1816, for a part of section 16. The lease purports to have been made in pursuance of a special act of the legislature, the premises thus leased being at the time of the lease in Fairfield county, but now in Hocking county. The declaration is in the usual form, except that it *does not aver that the defendant sealed the lease.
Read the full summary
This was action of covenant upon a lease executed under seal-by David Funk and two other trustees, etc., to the defendant,, ■dated May 27, 1816, for a part of section 16. The lease purports to have been made in pursuance of a special act of the legislature, the premises thus leased being at the time of the lease in Fairfield county, but now in Hocking county. The declaration is in the usual form, except that it *does not aver that the defendant sealed the lease. It averred, however, acceptance and enjoyment ■of the lease by the defendant. Several special pleas were filed, which were demurred…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Grimke
delivered the opinion of the court:
The question arising in this case is a very important one, and is,, I believe, for the first time, presented for decision in this country. It is, whether a person may, by certain acts of his own, such as his-acceptance of an interest conveyed by deed, which he never executed, bind himself to perform all the conditions and covenants-which it contains, as effectually as if he had in a formal manner sealed and delivered the instrument. The general rule undoubtedly is, that the action of covenant can not be maintained, except against a person who, by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goodwin v. GilbertMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
3Cited by2 opinions
- Schram v. CoyneCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
- Zakrajsek v. VeselOhio Court of Appeals · 1930