Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Wright's Administrator

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 15, 1859PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis Land Court. Demurrer to a petition. The petition is as follows: “ The plaintiff states that one William F. Wright in his lifetime, by an indenture made between him of the one part, and Peter Difley of the other part, dated the 27th day of April, 1852, the said William F. Wright did lease unto the said Peter Difley a certain lot of ground and premises therein more particularly mentioned and described, situate in the city and county of St. Louis, in the…

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis Land Court. Demurrer to a petition. The petition is as follows: “ The plaintiff states that one William F. Wright in his lifetime, by an indenture made between him of the one part, and Peter Difley of the other part, dated the 27th day of April, 1852, the said William F. Wright did lease unto the said Peter Difley a certain lot of ground and premises therein more particularly mentioned and described, situate in the city and county of St. Louis, in the state of Missouri, for the term and at the rents and upon the covenants and stipulations therein particularly set forth,…

1Opinion of the CourtRichardsoN, Judge

The words relied upon in this case as creating a covenant for quiet enjoyment are these: “ The said Wright hereby leases unto said Difley,” &c. It is almost an axiom in the law that the words “ demisi,” “ concessi,” or demise and grant, in a lease for years contain an implied covenant for quiet enjoyment and that the lessor had power to demise ; but it is insisted that no other words have that technical operation. In many of the early cases, which discuss the force of particular words on this subject, the leases were in Latin, and, as the words “ demisi” or “ concessi” were always employed,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Maule v. AshmeadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Boone v. StoverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
  2. Dupree v. Worthen Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
  3. Cohen v. HaydenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  4. Kemmerer v. Midland Oil & Drilling Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API