Nixon v. Hyserott
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action brought on the covenant of seisin7 in a deed, executed by the defendants, by their attorney, Anthony Maxwell, to the plaintiff. Plea, non est factum, fe?c.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action brought on the covenant of seisin7 in a deed, executed by the defendants, by their attorney, Anthony Maxwell, to the plaintiff. Plea, non est factum, fe?c. The letter of attorney was dated the first day of March, 1804. The defendants constituted Maxwell, their attorney, in their names and to their use, to grant, bargain, sell, release, convey and confirm, in fee, to any person, certain specified lots, in the military tract, and on stlch sale, to “ execute, seal and deliver in their names, such conveyances and assurances in the law of the premises, unto the purchaser, his,…
1Per curiam
The attorney was authorised to sell and to execute conveyances, and assurances in the law, of the lands sold ; but no authority was given to bind his principal, by covenants. A conveyance or assurance is good and perfect without either warranty or personal covenants ; and therefore they are not necessarily implied in an authority to convey ; an authority is to be strictly pursued, and an act varying in substance from it is void. There must be a judgment of nonsuit, according to the ’ direction in the case.
Van Ness, J.
having formerly been concerned as counsel in the cause, gave no opinion.
Judgm…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Wilson v. TroupCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1823
- Le Roy v. BeardSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Fuller v. HubbardNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- Moody v. ThrelkeldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
- Andrews v. KneelandNew York Supreme Court · 1826
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.