Davis v. Lyman
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This was an action upon a covenant in a deed, executed by the defendants, conveying to the plaintiff a piece of land. The declaration consisted of two counts.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was an action upon a covenant in a deed, executed by the defendants, conveying to the plaintiff a piece of land. The declaration consisted of two counts. In the first, the plaintiff averred, That on the 21st of October, 1815, the defendants granted to the plaintiff, by deed, in certain described land an estate in fee simple, and therein covenanted, that they had done no act or thing, whereby to affect, change, or alter their title to the premises; and that they were clear of all mortgages, judgments or liens of the defendants, of any nature or kind whatsoever. By way of breach,…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer. Ch J.
The plaintiff having founded his action on a covenant, its construction first claims attention.
Covenants are to be construed according to their spirit and intent. Quackenboss v. Lansing, 6 Johns. Rep. 49. Campbell v. Jones, 6 Term Rep. 570. Porter v. Shepard, 6 Term Rep. 668. Motion v Lamb, 7 Term Rep. 125. 1 Wms. Saund. 320. n. The law has appropriated no particular form of expression to their creation; and ang words are sufficient, which show the intention of the parties. 4 Cruise's Dig. 447. They are not, of course, to be interpreted by the letter of them; but from a survey of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mitchell v. WarnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
- Bickford v. PageMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
3Cited by12 opinions
- H. J. Lewis Oyster Co. v. WestSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Hubbard v. NortonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1835
- Mecklem v. BlakeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
- Eastabrook v. HapgoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Dick v. Sears-Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.