Carroll v. Carroll
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Warren District Gourt. — Hon. James D. Gamble, Judge. The parties are husband and wife. In February, 1895, the defendant deeded to plaintiff an interest in certain real property by’ full warranty deed. It was afterwards judicially declared that her title thereto was invalid.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Warren District Gourt. — Hon. James D. Gamble, Judge. The parties are husband and wife. In February, 1895, the defendant deeded to plaintiff an interest in certain real property by’ full warranty deed. It was afterwards judicially declared that her title thereto was invalid. Subsequent to this decision, and on the eighteenth day of February, 1896, the plaintiff reconveyed to the defendant the property she had deeded1 to him, and his deed also contained full covenants of warranty. This is an action to recover for a breach of the defendant’s warranty. She pleads want of…
1Opinion of the Court
Sherwin, I.
1 The only error argued relates to an instruction which told the jury that, if it found that the plaintiff executed and delivered to the defendant a deed of the property in question, such deed “operated as an assignment of any cause of action he may have had against the defendant because of the failure of title to the premises described in the deed.” That the defendant’s title failed, and that there was a consequent breach of her covenant of warranty, all parties concede. Whether the plaintiff suffered any damage thereby was one of the questions submitted for the determination of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Brown v. MetzIllinois Supreme Court · 1864
- Brown v. StaplesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1848
- Silverman v. LoomisIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
- Goodel v. BennettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by3 opinions
- Duke v. TylerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
- Kay Pharmacal Co. v. Dalious Construction Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954
- Crosby v. EvansSupreme Court of Missouri · 1920