Prescott v. Williams
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
In an action oí covenant broken, the plaintiff alleged in his declaration that the defendant’s intestate, David Dudley, by a deed, dated April 20th 1835, conveyed to the plaintiff a parcel of land in Roxbury, and therein covenanted that the premises, so conveyed, were free from all incumbrances, and that he would warrant and defend the same against the lawful claims and demands of all persons ; “ but that there was, long before and at the time, and ever since the making of…
Read the full summary
In an action oí covenant broken, the plaintiff alleged in his declaration that the defendant’s intestate, David Dudley, by a deed, dated April 20th 1835, conveyed to the plaintiff a parcel of land in Roxbury, and therein covenanted that the premises, so conveyed, were free from all incumbrances, and that he would warrant and defend the same against the lawful claims and demands of all persons ; “ but that there was, long before and at the time, and ever since the making of said deed and covenants, the right in the owners and occupants of a certain ancient mill, near and above said premises,…
1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.
The first question is, whether, upon the facts found in the case, the plaintiff has established the alleged breach of covenant in the deed of the defendant’s intestate. The institution of the plaintiff’s suit against Richard White, and the proceedings therein, and final result thereof, do not of themselves establish such breach of covenant. It is true that the plaintiff failed to maintain his suit, and that judgment was rendered for the defendant White ; but the present defendant is not bound by the result of that case, inasmuch as his intestate was not a party to it, and the plaintiff did…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Grammas v. ColasurdoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
- Stanfield v. SchneidewindSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1921