Mohr v. Parmelee
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal by defendant from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff upon the verdict of a jury. The action was brought to recover damages for the breach of a covenant against incumbrances, contained in a deed from defendant to plaintiff, bearing date January 17, 1870, and purporting to convey to the plaintiff, in fee, certain premises in the city of New York, consisting of a lot of land with the dwelling-house thereon, said lot being twenty-one feet and eight inches wide, by…
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff upon the verdict of a jury. The action was brought to recover damages for the breach of a covenant against incumbrances, contained in a deed from defendant to plaintiff, bearing date January 17, 1870, and purporting to convey to the plaintiff, in fee, certain premises in the city of New York, consisting of a lot of land with the dwelling-house thereon, said lot being twenty-one feet and eight inches wide, by ninety-eight feet and nine inches deep. The complaint alleges that on January 17, 1870, by deed bearing date on that day,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Sanford, J.
—The points made by defendant’s counsel, upon the argument, as constituting grounds for a reversal of the judgment, are:
(1.) That the agreement between North and Walkeconstituted no incumbrance upon the premises granted, and, therefore, the plaintiff showed no breach.
(2.) That no actual damage had been shown, and only nominal damages were, therefore, recoverable.
(3.) That if entitled to recover more than nominal damages the plaintiff was not entitled to the diminution in value of the property at the time of his purchase, by reason of the existence of the incumbrance,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hendricks v. . StarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Giles v. DugroThe Superior Court of New York City · 1852
- Brown v. . McKeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
3Cited by1 opinion
- Taxman v. McMahanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963