Chinn v. Wagoner
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from tlie Greene County Circuit Court, James R. Yaughan, Judge. This suit is based upon the agreement of the defendant, contained in his deed, to satisfy the Uilmann deed of trust, and fraud in failing to satisfy it, and selling the land subject to it, and not for breach of the covenant against an incumbrance, and there is a broad difference between a contract to discharge or acquit from a debt, and one to discharge or acquit from damage by reason of it. 2 Sutherland…
Read the full summary
Appeal from tlie Greene County Circuit Court, James R. Yaughan, Judge. This suit is based upon the agreement of the defendant, contained in his deed, to satisfy the Uilmann deed of trust, and fraud in failing to satisfy it, and selling the land subject to it, and not for breach of the covenant against an incumbrance, and there is a broad difference between a contract to discharge or acquit from a debt, and one to discharge or acquit from damage by reason of it. 2 Sutherland on Damages, pp. 329 and 330. This is a covenant to pay the Uilmann debt. Shelton r>. Pease, 10 Mo. 473 ; Thomas, v.…
1Opinion of the CourtRombauer, J.
This action is founded upon the following facts alleged in the plaintiff’s petition :
The plaintiff, in January, 1884, bought of the defendant a tract of land for two thousand dollars, of which sum he xiaid five hundred and sixty dollars in cash and property, and executed his notes for the residue secured by dedd of trust on the premises, of which notes the amount of one hundred and fifty dollars was subsequently paid, making the entire payment seven hundred and ten dollars.
The tract thus purchased was part of a larger tract, and such larger tract was, at the date of the purchase, subject to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Carpenter v. DenoonOhio Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dixon v. McCannSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
- Campbell Glass & Paint Co. v. Davis-Page Planing Mill Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908