Caswell v. Wendell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of covenant broken, on a deed, by which the defendant, as surviving executor of the last will of JohnErving, Esq., deceased, conveyed several parcels of land to the plaintiff, and one William Tyler, deceased, in fee.
Read the full summary
This was an action of covenant broken, on a deed, by which the defendant, as surviving executor of the last will of JohnErving, Esq., deceased, conveyed several parcels of land to the plaintiff, and one William Tyler, deceased, in fee. The defendant covenanted that Erving, in his lifetime, and at the time of his death, was lawfully seised in fee of the premises; that they were free of all encumbrances ; that he had good right to convey the same by virtue of said last will; and that he would, in his said capacity of executor, warrant and defend the same against the lawful claims and demands of…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
As to the plaintiff’s objection, we are satisfied that the direction of the judge, as to the rule of assessing damages, was right. No covenant appeared to be broken, but the covenant that Erving, the testator, was lawfully seised. That covenant was broken at the time the conveyance was executed ; and the value of the land at that time, as agreed by the parties, with interest, is the measure of damages.
Let judgment he rendered according to the verdict.
See the cases of Marston vs. Hobbs, ante, vol. ii. 433, and Bickford vs. Page, ibid. 455. (a)
[See the cases referred to in the notes to…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Duvall v. CraigSupreme Court of the United States · 1817
- Marston v. HobbsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Gore v. BrazierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Brandt v. FosterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1857
- Davis v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.