How v. How
Superior Court of New Hampshire
THIS was an action of covenant broken. The declaration alleged, that said Asa, on 25th December, 1804, by his deed of that date duly executed, and in court to be produced, conveyed to one Mark How, then the plaintiff’s husband, a certain farm, which had before belonged to said Mark, and had been given by him to said Asa, without the privity of the plaintiff, to hold to said Mark, in fee and in mortgage, as collateral security for the performance of the conditions and…
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of covenant broken. The declaration alleged, that said Asa, on 25th December, 1804, by his deed of that date duly executed, and in court to be produced, conveyed to one Mark How, then the plaintiff’s husband, a certain farm, which had before belonged to said Mark, and had been given by him to said Asa, without the privity of the plaintiff, to hold to said Mark, in fee and in mortgage, as collateral security for the performance of the conditions and covenants in said deed under written, and that said Asa, in the same deed, with the consent of said Mark, covenanted with the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Richardson, C. I.
The question to be determined in this case is, whether Anna How can maintain covenant in her own right op the deed which she produces in court ? This question must be determined by the deed itself. No averment of matter out of the deed can alter the case. Every allegation in the declaration of matter not contained in the deed must be rejected as surplusage. 1 Salk. 197, Green vs. Horne.
The nature of the transaction is perfectly evident. Mark How, wishing to secure a maintenance for himself, his wife and infant son, had conveyed to Asa…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gardner v. GardnerNew York Supreme Court · 1813
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hinkley v. FowlerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1839
- Grafton Bank v. FlandersSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827