Miller's Administrator v. Young
Miller's Administrator v. Young
2 D.C. 53; 17 F. Cas. 365; 2 Cranch 53
Opinion of the Court
however,
had made up their opinion, that the statute against pretensed titles did not vacate the deed; and that the agreement to settle the account, being executed by a deed with general warranty, which was accepted by the plaintiff, the transaction was closed and could not be disaffirmed; and that the plaintiff must resort to his warranty..
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.