City of St. Louis v. Bissell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The ultimate extent of the vendor’s responsibility, under all or any of the usual covenants in his deed, is the purchase money, with interest.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The ultimate extent of the vendor’s responsibility, under all or any of the usual covenants in his deed, is the purchase money, with interest. If the eviction be only of a part of the land' purchased, the damages to be recovered■ under the covenant of. seizin are a ratable part of the original price,.and they are to bear the. same ratio -to the whole consideration that the value of the land to which the title has failed bears-to the value of. the-whole tract. (4 Kent’s Com. 477 ;• Dickson v. Desire’s Adm’r, 28 Mo'. 151.) ■ The measure of. damages in an…
1Opinion of the CourtWagneu, Judge
Bissell, by a- general warranty deed, containing -a covenant against encumbrances, dated July 18, 1867, conveyed to the city of St. Louis 9,5ioo acres of land for the consideration of $95,850, which was duly paid .to him by said city. The deed contained this clause: “Excepting and reserving to the temporary lessees of Lewis Bissell,-located on the bank of "the Mississippi.river, the right to remove and carry away the. buildings, by them respectively erected thereon.”
An act of the Legislature, entitled “ an act to enable the city of St. Louis-to procure a supply of. wholesome-water,” approved…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dickson v. Desire's AdministratorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
- Henderson v. Henderson's ExecutorsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1850
3Cited by13 opinions
- Walker's Administrator v. DeaverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Kellogg v. MalinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Hazelett v. WoodruffSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Durham v. Monumental Silver Mining Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1880
- McCord v. MasseyIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.