Swenk v. Stout
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Berks county, ss. Daniel Stout, late of Berks county, yeoman, was summoned to answer Adam Swenk of a plea that he hold unto him certain covenants, according to the force, form and effect of a certain deed poll by the said Daniel to the said Adam, made, &c. and whereupon the said Adam by John Spayd,his attorney,saith, that on the 11th day of August, cvrmo domwvi 1788, at the county aforesaid, the said Daniel, by a certain deed poll, with his seal sealed and now brought here…
Read the full summary
Berks county, ss. Daniel Stout, late of Berks county, yeoman, was summoned to answer Adam Swenk of a plea that he hold unto him certain covenants, according to the force, form and effect of a certain deed poll by the said Daniel to the said Adam, made, &c. and whereupon the said Adam by John Spayd,his attorney,saith, that on the 11th day of August, cvrmo domwvi 1788, at the county aforesaid, the said Daniel, by a certain deed poll, with his seal sealed and now brought here into court, the date whereof is the day and year aforesaid, for and in consideration of the sum of 55?. to him in hand…
1Opinion of the Court
■ By the court.
The declaration might have been more artificially drawn, but we consider it as substantially good. It is said (1Burr. 319 ) that the rules of pleading are founded in the closest logic, and the good sense of the cases cited must be, that as the plaintiff must entitle himself to his action, and as in covenants of quiet enjoyment and warranty the acts of wrong doers are not comprehended, (1 Stra. 400. Hob. 35, 3 Term Rep. 584 ) he should state a case, wherein the title of the covenanter must nécessarily have come in question. A lawful opposing right should therefore be averred,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Stewart v. WestSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850