Emerick v. . Hackett

New York Court of Appeals

Emerick v. . Hackett

84 N.E. 805, 192 N.Y. 162, 1908 N.Y. LEXIS 865

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 19, 1908

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 84 N.E. 805 (Emerick v. . Hackett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Emerick v. . Hackett, 84 N.E. 805, 192 N.Y. 162, 1908 N.Y. LEXIS 865 (N.Y. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We think the judgment of the trial court erroneous in having required the defendant to convey the lands by a “ warranty deed.” The contract of the parties was that the plaintiff should “ have the privilege of buying the farm ” of the defendant for $3,000, and it contained no provision for any covenants, or as to the form of the deed, upon the privilege being availed of. It was early settled in this state that in such cases the vendor was only bound to deliver a deed sufcient in law to pass the title. (Van Eps v Mayor, etc., of Schenectady, 12 Johns. 442; Ketchum v. Evertson, 13 ib. 359; Gazley v. Price, 16 ib. 267.)

As this farm was found to have been free from any liens or incumbrances at the time of the contract, it was proper to direct the defendant to convey it free from any such.

The judgment should be modified by striking therefrom the word “ warranty,” and as so modified should be affirmed, without costs in this court to either party.

Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

We think the judgment of the trial court erroneous in having required the defendant to convey the lands by a “ warranty deed.” The contract of the parties was that the plaintiff should “ have the privilege of buying the farm ” of the defendant for $3,000, and it contained no provision for any covenants, or as to the form of the deed, upon the privilege being availed of. It was early settled in this state that in such cases the vendor was only bound to deliver a deed sufcient in law to pass the title. (Van Eps v Mayor, etc., of Schenectady, 12 Johns. 442; Ketchum v. Evertson, 13 ib. 359; Gazley v. Price, 16 ib. 267.)

As this farm was found to have been free from any liens or incumbrances at the time of the contract, it was proper to direct the defendant to convey it free from any such.

The judgment should be modified by striking therefrom the word “ warranty,” and as so modified should be affirmed, without costs in this court to either party.

Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.E. 805, 192 N.Y. 162, 1908 N.Y. LEXIS 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emerick-v-hackett-ny-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack