Williams v. Hewitt

Citations

• 57 Wash. 62
• 106 P. 496
• 1910 Wash. LEXIS 694

Syllabus

<p>Covenants — Incumbrances—Building Restriction. A building restriction in the chain of title, whereby the grantor in a warranty deed was prohibited from erecting certain kinds of buildings after ten years or building within a certain distance of the street, constitutes a breach of a covenant against incumbrances; and a right of action accrues immediately before assertion of any right under the restriction.</p> <p>Covenants — Against Incumbrances — Damages—Ascertainment ' —Measure. It cannot be objected that damages for breach of covenant against incumbrances by reason of building restrictions are not susceptible of ascertainment with mathematical accuracy, the measure of damages being the diminished value of the land.</p> <p>Same- — Notice oe Incumbrance — Effect. A covenant against incumbrances protects against a building restriction in the chain of title of which the grantee had notice by record, as it covers known as well as unknown defects.</p> <p>Same — Damages—Evidence of Value — Admissibility. In an action for breach of covenant against incumbrances, evidence of the loss of a sale of the property by reason of the incumbrance is inadmissible to show the diminished value of the property.</p> <p>Appeal — Review-—Harmless Error — Evidence. In an action tried by the court without a jury, the admission of erroneous evidence is harmless, where the lower court doubted its admissibility and there was other competent evidence to establish the fact.</p>