Washington City Savings Bank v. Thornton

Citations

• 83 Va. 157
• 2 S.E. 193
• 1887 Va. LEXIS 49

Syllabus

<p>1. Multifariousness&emdash;Definition.&emdash;It is impossible to lay down any rule, applicable to all cases, as to what constitutes multifariousness. It is-well settled, however, that a bill is demurrable in which are united several distinct rights, each sufficient, as stated, to sustain a bill against one defendant, or in which there is a demand of several matters, distinct in their nature, against several defendants, who are unconnected in interest and liability.</p> <p>2. Idem&emdash;Case at bar.&emdash;Where bill is filed to obtain personal decree against defendant as endorser of notes ; to obtain like decree against him by way of damages for breach of warranty ; to quiet title to part of the land as to other defendants, and to sell same to pay the notes ; and to restrain the defendants from cutting timber on the land&emdash;</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>The bill is multifarious.</p> <p>3. Real Estate&emdash;Warranty of title&emdash;Trust deed&emdash;Beneficiaries&emdash;Case at bar.&emdash;Land (encumbered in favor of third person claiming under grantor,) is conveyed with special warranty, and trust deed is executed by grantee to secure his notes given for purchase money, that are endorsed by grantor to third person. In suit by endorsee on the notes and breach of warranty, it appearing that plaintiff was not entitled to possession of the land, had not been evicted, or kept out of possession by parties in possession under better title, and that warranty of title is not covenant against encumbrances, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover. Marbury v. Thornton, 82 Va. 702.</p>