Legal Opinion
Harsin v. Oman
Washington Supreme Court
Decided April 24, 1912No. 9691PublishedCited by 14 opinions
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Spokane county, Sullivan, J., entered May 5, 1911, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, after a trial on the merits before the court without a jury, in an action for breach of covenant.
1Opinion of the CourtMorris, J.
It is sought in this action to recover for the breach of a covenant against incumbrances. The covenant is as follows:
“And the said L. L. Oman and Ida E. Oman, husband and wife, parties of the first part, for their heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns, that they are well seized in fee *282of the lands and premises aforesaid, and have good right to sell and convey the same in manner and form aforesaid, and that the same are free from all incumbrances.”
Appellants admit that, at the time of the passing of the deed containing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wisconsin v. TorinusSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Whipple v. ParkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Hilmert v. ChristianWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Judd v. RandallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Traynor v. PalmerIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Mellor v. ChamberlinWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- Meder v. CCME CORP.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1972
- Weaver v. City of EverettWashington Supreme Court · 2019
- Currier v. PerryWashington Supreme Court · 1935
- Marshall v. Thurston CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.