Ingersoll v. Hall
New York Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. On the 4th of December, 1856, the plaintiff and others conveyed to the defendant John S. Wright certain lands in the county of Monroe, by a deed which contained the following covenant, and no other, viz: “And the said parties of the first part," for themselves, -their heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant, grant, bargain, promise and agree, to and with the said party of the second part, his heirs and…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. On the 4th of December, 1856, the plaintiff and others conveyed to the defendant John S. Wright certain lands in the county of Monroe, by a deed which contained the following covenant, and no other, viz: “And the said parties of the first part," for themselves, -their heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant, grant, bargain, promise and agree, to and with the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns, to warrant and for ever defend the above granted premises, and every part and parcel thereof, now being in the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, T. R. Strong, J.
I am satisfied that the covenant in the deed from the plaintiff and others to the defendant Wright is merely for quiet enjoyment. The first clause is in the usual form of such a covenant; and the latter clause defines in part what the former is to embrace1—“hereby intending,” &o. There is nothing in the last clause manifesting an intention to vary the nature of the covenant, or to do more than to make it certainly applicable to disturbances of thé possession by virtue or in consequence of “ any lien, judgment or incumbrance,” &c. as in that clause mentioned. It…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Rindskopf v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1870