¶1A covenant “ to indemnify and save harmless from all demands, dues and damages whatsoever, which might happen or arise on account of a certain mortgage,” is tantamount to a covenant for quiet enjoyment against the mortgage, and the plaintiff must show an eviction under the mortgage. The case comes within the principle of the decisions in Waldron v. McCarty, (3 Johns. Rep. 471.) and of Kortz v. Carpenter. (S Johns. Rep. 120.) Judgment must be rendered "for the defendant.
8 Johns. 198
Van Slyck v. Kimball
Decided August 15, 1811
New York Supreme Court · decided 1811-08-15
THIS was an action of covenant. The declaration stated that the defendant, by his deed, dated the 13th of January, 1807,. covenanted with the plaintiff to indemnify and s.ave hicn harmless from all demands, dues or damages whatsoever; which should or might happen or arise to him, for or on account of a mortgage executed by one Julius Shaw'to ,one John White, for the whole of the western quarter of lot JNo. 41. in Springfield.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 1829
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1811-08-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →