Case Name: Elisha Bigelow versus Thankful Jones, Administratrix of Farewell Jones
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1808-09
Citations: 3 Tyng 512
Docket Number: 
Parties: Elisha Bigelow versus Thankful Jones, Administratrix of Farewell Jones.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 448–449

Head Matter:
Elisha Bigelow versus Thankful Jones, Administratrix of Farewell Jones.
The lands of a deceased testator being hable to be levied on, to satisfy the debts which he owed, the conveyance of those lands by the devisee does net defeat the lien of the creditor, but they may be taken from the purchaser; and the delivery of seisin by the sheriff is an eviction of the tenant, whose damages are to be measured by the value of the land at the time of the eviction, with the addition of interest
This was an action of covenant broken, founded on a deed of conveyance made by the defendant’s intestate to the plaintiff, bearing date March 24, 1802. The parties submitted the cause to the opinion of the Court, without argument, on a statement of facts, whereby it was agreed that the said intestate made the deed declared on, by which he conveyed the land therein described to the plaintiff in fee simple, with covenants that he was seised in fee of the premises; that they were free of all encumbrances [ *513 ] and that he would warrant * and defend the same to the plaintiff, and his heirs and assigns, forever, against the lawful claims and demands of all persons.
The land formerly belonged to Moses Gill, Esq., who devised it to his nephew Moses Gill in fee simple, who conveyed it to the defendant’s intestate in fee. The same land was afterwards levied upon by Ward N. Boylston, under the judgment recited in the case of Wyman vs. Brigden, ante, 150. And the plaintiff, knowing that the said land was parcel of the estate of the said M. G. deceased, and believing that it was liable for the payment of his debts, did not resist the said levy, and the said W. N. B. has ever since had possession thereof.
Upon these facts, it was agreed by the parties that if the Court should be of opinion that the plaintiff has a right to maintain this action, the defendant should confess judgment for such damages as the Court should think the plaintiff had sustained, with costs. But if the Court should be of a different opinion, the plaintiff should become nonsuit, and the defendant recover her costs.
A. Bigelow for the plaintiff.
T. Bigelow for the defendant.

Opinion:
Parsons, C. J.
The several questions arising on these facts have been already decided by the Court in the cases of Gore vs. Brazier, (ante vol. iii. 523,) and Wyman vs. Brigden, (ante, 150,) and the plaintiff must have judgment, unless we should overturn those decisions, which were made on covenants of warranty in the conveyances of lands executed by the same devisee, under the same will of the late Lieutenant-Governor Gill, and which had been broken by the eviction of the grantees, to satisfy the demands of the same judgment creditor.
We have decided that the lands of the testator are liable to be levied on, to satisfy the debts which he owed ; that the conveyance of these lands by the devisee did not defeat the lien of the creditor, to whom no loches were imputable ; that these lands might be levied on, and taken from the purchaser; and that the delivery of seisin by the sheriff to the creditor in satisfaction of his execution is an eviction of the tenant. These decisions necessarily resulted from the obvious construction of the statutes, making lands and tenements liable for the payment of debts.
*The damages in this case must be measured by the [*514] value of the land at the time of the eviction; to which interest may be added, until the time when the damages are assessed.
Let judgment be entered for the plaintiff.