Page images
PDF
EPUB

57

Woodhull t.

Holmes, 10 Johns. Wyburd o. Tuck, 1 Bos. & Pul. 231, 244 464,

41 Woodman v. Thurston, 8 Cush. Wyld v. Hopkins, 15 M. & W. 159,

188
517,

337 Woods v. McGee, 7 Ohio 469, 418 Wyld v. Puckford, 8 M. & W. Woodson &c. v. Barret & Co. 2

461,

535 H. & M. 80,

321 Wylie o. Burch, 4 Adol. & El. Woodworth v. Bank of America, N. S. 566,

586 18 Johns. 315,

138 Wyman 0. Am. Powder Co. 8 Wookey n. Pole &c. 4 Barn. &

Cush. 168,

397 Ald. 6,

507 Wyman v. Ballard, 12 Mass. 304, Woolf o. Beard, 8 C. & P. 373, 661

101, 6, 8 Woolfolk v. McDowell, 9 Dana Wynn v. Allard, 5 W. & S. 524, 659 270,

274 Wynn v. Brooke &c. 5 Rawle 109, 439 Woolley o. Constant, 4 Johns.

Wynne &c. o. Rakes &c. 5 East 59, 13, 26 514,

154 Woolley v. Watling, 7 C. & P.

Wysham o. Rossen, li Johns. 72, 406 610,

376 Wythers o. Henley, 3 Balst. 96, 578 Woolnoth v. Meadows, 5 East 463,

603, 12

х Woolson o. Northern R. C. Decr 1848,

653 | Ximines o. Jaques, 6 T. R. 499, 320 Wootton v. Cooke, Dyer 217, 75 Word v. Audland, 16 M. & W.

Y 875, Worden o. Dodge &c. 4 Denio

Yates o. Eastwood &c, 6 W. H. 159, 165 & G. 806,

448 Wormley o. Lowry, 1 Humph.

Yates v. Foot, 12 Johns. 1, 481 468,

251 Yates's adm'r v. Hollingsworth, Wortes v. Clifton, 1 Roll. 61, 490 5 H. & J. 216,

311 Wright &c. o. Campbell &c.

Yates v. Lansing, 5 Johns. 282, 569 4 Burr. 2051,

505 Y. N. & B. Railway v. Crisp &c. Wright o. Colls, 8 Man. Gr. &

14 Com. Bench (5 J. Scott) 527, 537 Scott 163,

455 Yorke v. Grenaugh, 2 Ld. Raym. Wright v. Hart, 18 Wend. 452, 362 866,

520, 44 Wright v. Howard, 1 Sim. & Stu. Young v. Adams, 6 Mass. 182, 456 190,

677 Young v. Cole, 3 Bingh. N. C. Wright v. Johns. 8 Wend. 512, 291

724,

456 Wright o. Lawes, 4 Esp. 82, 499 Young o. Covell, 8 Johns. 23, 620 Wright v. Shawcross, 2 Barn. & Young v. Grote &c. 4 Bing. 253, 433 Ald. 501,

199 Young v. Herbert, 2 Noit & M. Wright v. Snell &c. 5 Barn. & Ald.

172,

570 350,

541 Young v. Hos 11 Mass. 89, 581 Wright o. Strange, 5 B. Monroe Young v. Raincock, 7 Man. Gr. 252, 280 & Scott 339,

87 Wright &c. o. Wakeford, 4 Taunt. Young o. Warne &c. 2 Rob. 420, 330 214,

29 | Youngs v. Ball, 9 Watts 141, 233 Wright v. Wilcox, 19 Wend. 343,

699

z Wright o. Wright &c. 1 Cow. 598,

494 Zeilly v. Warren, 17 Johors. 192, 481 Wyatı 7. Campbell, 1 Moo. &

Zouch v. Clay, 1 Ventr. 187, 23, 6 Malk. 80,

244 Zurano &c. v. Wilson &c. Wyatt v. Harrison, 3 Barn. &

8 Cush. 424,

431 Adol. 871,

689

ER R A TA.

Page 27, line 11 from bottom, 3 Id. 467, should be 3 Harris 467.

28, line 16, the figures should be 413 instead of 313.
40, lines 21. 22, strike out the words what might be implied from.
50, line 1, for or read and.
67, line 12 from bottom, for independent read dependent.
71, insert a comma after the word duty, at the end of 17th line; and after

the word it, in 19th line. 74, line 11, 1 M. & W.111, should be 2 M. & W. 122. 75, line 16 from bottom, for run read ran. 83, line 7, the book of Rep. should be 5 instead of 4 Rep. 93, line 4 from bottom, for lessor read lessee. 110, line 18, for rendor read rendee ; and strike out the comma. 118, line 9 from bottom, strike out not. 119, lines 7, 8, for obligor read obligee. 127, line 6 of 2d section, for establish read established. 135, line 8, the figures should be 274 instead of 514. 149, line 3, after 10 Id. the figures should be 579 instead of 379. 159, line 6, after 19 Pick, the figures should be 99 instead of 199. 183, line 4, after 20 Wend. should be the figures #1 instead of 1. 225, end of 20 section, 6 Johns. 620 should be 6 Wend. 620. 243, last line, strike out plaintif has and insert it has been. 246, line 8, for lays read lies. 246, line 12 from botiom, for bona fide read bona fides. 247, in 1st paragraph, Herrick v. Carman should be cited from 12 Johns.

instead of 11 Johns. 255, line 17, for lays read lies. 236, line 25, for obligors read obligee. 276, line 8, the figures should be 31 instead of 331. 278, line 6 of 3d paragraph, 5 Leigh should be 6 Leigh. 281, beginning of line 8 from bottom, the figures 205 shouid be 105. 281, section 16, Whaley v. Van Hook should be cited from 4 instead of 3

B. Monroe. 237, line 28, for defect read defeat. 288, line 7, after 14 Id. the figures should be 349 instead of 139. 301, line 8 from bottom, after bond for or read as. 30.), line 11 from bottom, the figures 348 should be 438. 3:36, line 17, Ganseroort v. Williams should be cited from 14 Wend. instead 351, line 4 of $ 3, after disclose strike out of.

of 15 Wend. 427, last line of 7th section, the case cited from 2 Cow. should be 408 in

stead of 508. 462, line 15, the case cited is in 20 instead of 2 Johns. 135. 465, line 4 from bottom, 13 Wash. should be 12 Wheat. 466, line 22 from bottom, 4 Harris and Gill should be 4 Harris and Johns. 488, end of chapter 41, the figures 260 should be 280.

PART

II.

OF PERSONAL ACTIONS.

THE RIGHT OF ACTION; THE PARTIES WHO MAY SUE AND BE SUED; THE FORM OF ACTION; AND THE FRAME OF THE DECLARATION.

TITLE I.

RIGHT OF ACTION ON A SEALED INSTRUMENT; OR

UPON A JUDGMENT OR DECREE.

а

a

CHAP. 1. What is a sealed instrument. 2. Of the delivery necessary to make the instrument a valid

obligation. 3. What is deemed part of the instrument; how it is affected

by an alteration or addition. 4. On a sealed instrument, though without consideration, there

may be a right of action when no illegality appears. 5. Of the right of action on covenants generally-express and

implied; by what words created; how to be construed

and performed. 6. Of conditions precedent; what performance by plaintiff

must precede his action. 7. When material that instrument should be executed by cove

nantee as well as covenantor; what covenants run with the land and give a right of action for or against an heir or assignee.

Cuap. 8. Of the action on covenants in the conveyance of land, which

are broken at the instant; and on covenants in the sale

of chattels. 9. Whether without covenant of indemnity or other special

covenant by sub-lessee or assignee, there is a right of action against him by his assignor for breach of covenants

in original lease. 10. Of the action on a covenant or obligation to indemnify. 11. Of the action on a judgment or decree. 12. Of the action against an cxecutor or administrator or bis

representatives or sureties for a devastarit.

[blocks in formation]

The Romans generally used a ring, but the seal was valid in law if made with one's own or another's ring, and according to Heineccius, with any other instrument which would make an impression; and this, he says, is the law throughout Germany. The passage of Heineccius is referred to by Kent, C. J., in Warren v. Lynch, 5 Johus. 217.

Lord Coke, after mentioning that a deed must be sealed, adds these words, that is, have some impression upon the wax, for sigillum est cera impressa quiu cera sine impressione non est sigillum. 3 Inst. ch. 75, p. 169.

a

2. Opinions of Judges Pendleton, Kent and Nott contrasted.

President Pendleton considering Lord Coke as saying “a seal is wax with an impression," regards this as his opinion only, founded probably on the practice of that day. If that gives a binding rule, we may, Judge Pendleton thinks, by going further back, discover a period of time when the impression was made with the eye tooth. There was, he remarks, some utility in that custom, since the tooth impressed was the man's own and furuished a test in case of forgery.

Jones fec. v. Logwood, 1 Wash. 44.

On the other hand, Judge Kent considers the ancient authorities explicit, that a seal does in legal contemplation mean an impression upon wax; this point seemed to him to be necessarily assumed and taken for granted in several passages in

« PreviousContinue »