Waldo v. Long

Decided November 15, 1810

New York Supreme Court · decided 1810-11-15

THIS was an action of covenant, brought on the co-. ..■venant against encumbrances, and on the covenant of power to sell, contained in a deed from the defendant „ to the plaintiff. Flea, non est factum. The cause was tried at the Washington circuit, the 13th of June, 1810, before Mr. Justice Van Ness. The plaintiff produced a mortgage, executed prior tá the deed from the defendant to him, from the defendant to William Porter, which covéred the land conveyed by the deed.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1810-11-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1887

5 state decisions

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.

¶1The postea was competent evidence for certain purposes. This point has been just now decided, in the case of Kip v. Brigham and others, (ante, 168.) who were bail on Steward’s execution. In this case it was evidence of the existence of.the ejectment suit upon the mortgage, and of the fact of a verdict in such a cause. For that purpose it ought to have been received; and that fact being proved, the bills of costs . were an item of damages proper for the consideration of the jury, for they were part of the damages produced by the encumbrance.

¶2■ This opinion is an answer to the only question submitted. The plaintiff has taken a verdict for the consi*175deration-money and interest, and no objection is raised to it, and of course we have no concern with the amount of the recovery.

¶3' Judgment for the plaintiff.(a)

¶4 See Prescott v. Trueman, (4 Tyng's Mass. Rep. 627.) Pitcher v. Livingston, (4 Johns. Rep. 1.) S Caines, 112. 2 Mass. Rep. 453.