Delavergne v. Norris
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of covenant. The plaintiff de.' dared, on a breach of the several covenants contained in. a deed, that the grantor was well ceised, &c. for the quiet enjoyment of the grantee; that the premises were free from encumbrances, and that thedefendant had good right and title to sell and convey, &c. The cause was tried at the Duchess circuit, in Sep.~ teinber, 1810, before the Chief Justice.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of covenant. The plaintiff de.' dared, on a breach of the several covenants contained in. a deed, that the grantor was well ceised, &c. for the quiet enjoyment of the grantee; that the premises were free from encumbrances, and that thedefendant had good right and title to sell and convey, &c. The cause was tried at the Duchess circuit, in Sep.~ teinber, 1810, before the Chief Justice. The deed containing the covenants was proved; and there were several mortgages on the premises, duly recorded, on which, the plaintiff had paid the sum of 1,165 dollars and 44 cents; and the…
1Per curiam
The verdict ought to be entered for the 1,165 dollars and 14 cents only. If the plaintiff, when he sues on a covenant against encumbrances, has extinguished the encumbrance, he is entitled to recover the' price he has paid for it. But if he has not extinguished it, but it is still an outstanding encumbrance, his damages are but nominal, for he. ought not to recover the value of an incumbrance, on a contingency, where he may never be disturbed by it. This is the reasonable rule; for if he was to recover the value of an outstanding mortgage, the mortgagee might still resort to the defendant, on…
2Cited by46 opinions
- Marston v. HobbsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Hoyt Post v. CampauMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Dickson v. Desire's AdministratorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
- Funk v. CreswellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1857
- Bush v. AdamsSupreme Court of Florida · 1886
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.