Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

9 S.C.L. 329

Anderson v. Solomon

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 15, 1818

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1818-05-15

This was an action of assumpsit, brought to recover back the pnce oí a negro woman, under ,. * ° a warranty contained in a bill of sale under seal, that the woman was sound. The plaintiffs produced their bill of sale under seal, and proved it, and then proved a breach of warranty. The counsel for the defendant moved for a nonsuit, on the ground, that the action should have been covenant, and not assumpsit.

Decided 1818-05-15

¶1The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Gantt.

¶2Assumpsit cannot be supported, when there has been an express contract under seal, as in the present case, but the action must be, in such case, debt or covenant. It is also a rule that when a bond, or other security under seal, has been accepted in satisfaction of a simple contract, the latter is merged in such higher security ; and assumpsit is not sustainable. (See first Chitty’s Pleading, 94, 5, 6, and the authorities there referred to: also, Cro. Jac. 505. 2 Bacon Ab. 67. 3 Blacks. Com. 158. 3 Comyn’s Digest, 263.)

¶3*330I am of opinion the motion for a nonsuit should r prevail, the action of assumpsit not having been the proper remedy on an express warranty by deed, but that the action should have been covenant.

Grimke, Colcoclc, JVott, Cheves, and Johnson¿ J. concurred.
/9/scl/329 · .json · Public domain