Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

13 Johns. 404

Bradley v. Osterhoudt

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1816

New York Supreme Court · decided 1816-08-15

THIS was an action of covenant. The declaration contain-e . , . , ' ■ , and certain lands described' mine agreement: and covenanted. . ° ’’ • ■ , ? also, that he would not, in the mean time, cut any wood or tim* ber from the lands, except for firewood, and that he would not. feed-the lands in the spring of the year 1813, and that he would not remove the straw and manure made thereon, nor work any quarries on the land ; and the plaintiff, on his part-, covenanted to. pay the…

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1816-08-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1877

5 state decisions

101816182018301840185018601870decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1This is an action of covenant upon articles of agreement, by which the defendant covenanted to convey to the plaintiff by a good and sufficient deed, a full unincumbered title to a farm and piece .of land therein specified. The plaintiff in his declaration, assigns, as a breach of the covenant, that the defendant, after the making and execution thereof, and before the giving of the deed, removed from the premises u cider mill, *406which is averred to haye been annexed to, the freehold, .an! making a part of the fan», and so the defendant hath not eon-veyed to Him, the plaintiff, the said farm of land, according to the true intent and meaning .óf the .said covenant. .Tim defendant, after craving .oyerof the ¡agreement,, pleads, that he did,, within the timé therein specified, convey, to. the plaintiff, by a good and sufficient deed, a, full unincumbered title to the land in the said’ articles specified. To which plea there.is a general demurrer. This plea is bad. A particular breach having been, assigned in the declaration, the plea should have answered it. Whether the covenant to convey the farm would: also embrace the cider mill, might depend on circumstances. When the declaration avers, that it was annexed to the freehold, and making a part of the farm, the plea should have answered this breach. If the defendant relied on the acceptance of the deed as a. fulfilment and discharge of the covenant, be ought to have so pleaded. The general plea of performance is not a sufficient answer to the special breach assigned. The. plaintiff is, accordr ingly, entitled to judgment, with, leave, however, to the defends ant to amend his plea, . ■ ■ ,

¶2Judgment for the plaintiff?

/13/johns/404 · .json · Public domain