Legal Opinion

Comstock v. Comstock

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 15, 1854PublishedCited by 3 opinions

This was an action brought to the superior court, for the county of New London, by Jesse Comstock against Asa Comstock, upon the covenants of a warranty deed of a certain tract of land situated in the town of Montville.

Read the full summary

This was an action brought to the superior court, for the county of New London, by Jesse Comstock against Asa Comstock, upon the covenants of a warranty deed of a certain tract of land situated in the town of Montville. The breach, alleged in the plaintiff’s declaration, was as follows: “ That, at the time of the date, execution and delivery of said deed, said Asa was not the owner of said premises, as of an estate in fee simple, but had no greater or other estate otherwise than an estate in tail to himself, and the heirs of his body, and had not good right to bargain and sell the same as…

1Opinion of the CourtEllsworth, J.

There is no doubt that the plaintiff is entitled to recover for the breaches of covenants stated in the declaration. The defendant, when he executed the deed, was not seized of the premises, as a good, indefeasible estate in fee simple, nor were the premises free of incum*352brance, nor had the plaintiff a right to sell them in fee simple. The estate of the defendant, under his father’s will, is an estate tail, and nothing more; his lineal heirs only being entitled to take under and through him, and he never having any greater than a life estate to convey. To this point it cannot be necessary to…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Comstock v. GaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1883
  2. Turrill v. NorthropSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1883
  3. Rudkin v. RandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API