Source: https://chestofbooks.com/real-estate/Real-Property-Interests-Law/Sec-453-Covenants-for-quiet-enjoyment-and-of-warranty.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 20:46:12+00:00

Document:
42. Ante, Sec. 438, note 93.
42a. Gill v. Ferrin. 71 N. H. 421, 52 Atl. 558; Johnston v. Markle Paper Co., 153 Pa. 195, 25 Atl. 560, 885; Johnson v. Elmen, 94 Tex. 168, 52 L. R. A. 162, 86 Am. St. Rep. 845, 59 S. W. 253.
42b. Ante, Sec. 438, note 92.
43. Rawle, Covenants, Sec. 114; Copeland v. Mcadory, 100 Ala. 553, 13 So. 545; Mitchell v. Warner, 5 Conn. 497; Bostwick v. Williams, 36 111. 65, 85 Am. Dec. 385; Kramer v. Carter, 136 Mass. 504.
44. Rawle, Covenants, Sec.Sec. 110-114.
45. Ante, Sec. 452, note 38.
46. Mackintosh v. Stewart, 181 Ala. 328, 61 So. 956; Flynn v. White Breast Coal etc. Co., 72 Iowa, 738, 32 N. W. 471; Cornelius v. Kinnard, 157 Ky. 50, 162 S. W. 524; Downs v. Nally, 161 Ky. 432, 170 S. W. 1193; Contra. Janes v. Jenkins, 34 Md. 1, 6 Am. Rep. 300.
47. See Mcandrews & Forbes Co. v. Camden Nat. Bk., 87 N. J. L. 231, 94 Atl. 627; Hymes v. Estey, 166 N. Y. 505, 15 Am. St. Rep. 421, 22 N. E. 1087 (highway).
Snell v. Young, 3 Ired. L. (25 N. Car.) 379; Rawle, Covenants, Sec. 298.
49. Emeric v. Alvarado, 90 Cal. 444, 27 Pac. 356; Coster v. Monroe Mfg. Co., 2 N. J. Eq. 467; Lamb v. Wakefield, 1 Sawy. (U. S.) 251.
50. Miller v. De Graffenried, 43 Colo. 306, 15 Ann. Cas. 981. 95 Pac. 941; Drury v. Holdcn, 121 111. 130; Freeman v. Baxter, 55 Me. 508; Hopper v. Smyser, 90 Md. 363, 45 Atl. 206; Brown v. South Boston Sav. Bk., 148 Mass. 300, 19 N. E. 382; Shafer v. Wi man, 47 Mich. 63, 10 N. W. 104.
51. Reynolds v. Shaver, 59 Ark. 299, 43 Am. St. Rep. 36, 27 S. W. 78; Mcnear v. Mccomber, 18 Iowa, 12; Ballard v. Child, 46 Me. 152; White & Corbitt v. Stewart, 131 Ga. 460, 62 S. E. 590; Combs v. Combs, 130 Ky. 827, 114 S. W. 334; Sweet v. Brown, 12 Mete. (Mass.) 175, 45 Am. Dec. 243; Coble v. Barringer, 171 N. Car. 445, 88 S. E. 518; Hull v. Hull, 35 W. Va. 155, 13 S. E. 49, 29 Am. St. Rep. 800. But see Bayley v. Mccoy, 8 Oreg. 259; Peck v. Hensley, 20 Tex. 67.
52. Locke v. White, 89 Ind. 492; Hubbard v. Apthorp, 3 Cush. (Mass.) 419; Steiner v. Baugh-man, 12 Pa. 106; Mills v. Catlin, 22 Vt. 98.
Atl. 1024; Rickert v. Snyder, 9 Wend. (N. Y.) 415; Hampton Park Terrace v. Sottile, 102 S. C. 372, 86 S. E. 1066 (although known to the covenantee).
That an outstanding lease does not involve a breach, see Kellum v Berkshire Life Ins. Co., 101 Ind. 455; Hammond v. Jones, 41 Ind. App. 32, 83 N. E. 257; Knerb v. Beardsley, 139 Mo. App. 565, 123 S. W. 545 (grantee consenting to take lessee as his tenant); Baldwin v. Smith (Tex. Civ. App.), 119 S. W. Ill (if known to covenantee). See Simons v. Diamond Match Co., 159 Mich. 241, 123 N. W. 1132.
54. That a railway right of way involves a breach, see Flynn v. White Breast Coal etc. Co., 72 Iowa, 738, 32 N. W. 471; Schwartz v. Black, 131 Tenn. 360, 174 S. W. 1146 (nominal damages).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.