Kortz v. Carpenter
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of covenant. The declaration set forth a deed from the defendant to the plaintiff, dated the 17th December, 1806, for certain lands, in the county of Onondaga, in which, among other things, the defendant did covenant to and with the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns> that he, the defendant, the described premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of him, the plaintiff^ ]-js iie;rs ancj assigns, would warrant and forever defend.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of covenant. The declaration set forth a deed from the defendant to the plaintiff, dated the 17th December, 1806, for certain lands, in the county of Onondaga, in which, among other things, the defendant did covenant to and with the plaintiff, his heirs and assigns> that he, the defendant, the described premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of him, the plaintiff^ ]-js iie;rs ancj assigns, would warrant and forever defend. The declaration alleged a breach of this covenant; and. that the premises described, &c« at the time of executing the deed, and a long time…
1Per curiam
This case cannot be distinguished fronl that of Waldron v. M'Carty. (3 Johns. Rep. 471.) The covenant for quiet enjoyment goes to the possession and not to the title. It appears to be a technical rule, that nothing amounts to a breach of this covenant, but an actual eviction, or disturbance of the possession of the covenantee. (8 Co. 89. b. Comyn's Rep. Anon. 228.) The defendant is, therefore, entitled to judgment.
Judgment for the defendant.
2Cited by11 opinions
- Marston v. HobbsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Dyett v. PendletonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1826
- Levitzky v. CanningCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Fowler v. PolingNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Rea v. MinklerNew York Supreme Court · 1871
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.