Page:Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition).djvu/301

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.


COUSIN

Lion in all his letters and public acts; from which the use has descended to his successors. though the reason has long ago failed. Moziey & Whitley.

—l"ii-st cousins. Cousins-geriniin; drop of one‘s uncle or aunt. Sanderson v. Bay- ley. 4 Mylne XE C‘: :'.v9.—Second cousins. Persons who are related to each other by descend- iiu tram the same great-grandfatlier or great- -viudinother. The children of oue's first coiis- LI are his second cousins. These are some- iin-1 called "first cousins once removed.” .’~u-i- v Fooks 9 Sim. 387: Corporation of linlgnorth v. éoiiius. 15 Sim. 54].—Q!Inl;e1- rniisin. Properly, a cousin in the fourth tie-

-r~' but the term has come to express any

rtuue degree of relationship, and even to hear an irnriical signification in which it denotes ii LT] trifling degree of intimacy and regard. UT-"en corrupted into “ciiter" cousin.

the chil-

COUSINAGE. See Cosuvaen.

COUSTOM. Custom; duty; toll; trihute. 1 Bi Comm. 314.

COUSTOUMIER. (Otherwise spelled ‘cuusiunuc1"' ur “C'outumi'er.") In old i‘r-nch law. A collection of customs, un- iiiitten i.iws, and forms of procedure. Two such voiutnes are of especial importance in juridical history. viz., the Grimd Cuusiumier dc 1i'ormimdi.e, and the Coutumter de France or Grand Cautuiizier.

COUTHUTLAUGH. A person who Willlngiy and knowingly received an outlaw, and iherished or conceuied him; for which of- reuse he underwent the same punishment as the outlaw himself. Briict. 128b; Spelinan.

COUVEBTURE, in French law, is the deposit ("margin") made by the client in the hands of the broker, either of a sum of money or of securities, in order to guaranty the hroiier for the payment of the securities which he purchases for the client Arg. Fr. Mere. Law. 555.

COVENABLE. A French word signifying coiiienient or siiitahie: as covenably endowed. It is anciently written "convenahie." '1‘;-mies de la Ley.

COVENANT. In practice. The name of ill common-law form of action cm cantuzcm, which lies for the recovery of dam- ages for breach of a covenant, or contract iiiiuier seal. Stickney v. Stickney, 21 N. H 08.

In the law of contracts. An agreement, rr-iirciition, or promise of two or more parties by dead in writing, signed. sealed, and delivered, by which either of the parties i.-I-‘wives himself to the other that something is €l[l.1(‘1' done or shall he done, or stipulates for the truth of certain facts. Siihin v. Ham- lltou, 2 Ark. 490: (Join. v. Robinson, 1 \\‘nnu (Pa.) 160; Kent v. Edniondston, 49 i\'. U. 5'39.

in agreement between two or more parties, reduced to wriiing and executed by a seal-

293

COVENANT

ing and delivery thereof, whereby some of the parties named therein engage, or one of them engages, with the other, or others. or some of them, therein also named. that some set hath or hath not already been done, or for the performance or non-performance of some specified duty. De Boile v. Insur- ance Co., 4 Whiirt. (Pa.) 71, 33 Am Dec. 38.

Classification. Covenants may he cia.ssi- fieil according to several distinct priuiipl s of division. According as one or other of these is adopted, they are:

Express or implied: the former beinc those which are created by the express words of the parties to the deed declaratory of their intention, while implied coreunuts are those which are inferred by the law from certain words in a deed which imply (though they do not express) them. Express covenants are also calied cove- nants “in deed" as distinguished from cove- nants “in law. McDonou_ch v. \lartin_ 88 Ga. (375. 16 S. E. 59. ISL R. A. 343. Conrad v. lilorehcad. 89 N. C. 4}]: Garstiing v. Daven- port, 90 Iona. 359. 57 N. W. 876.

Dependent, concurrent, and Lndependn ant. Covenants are either dependent. concurrent, or miitual and independent. The fii-st depends on the prior pei'formanc(- of some act or condition, and, until the condition is performed, the other party is not liable to an action on his covenant. In the second, mutual acts are to he performed at the same time: and if one party is ready, and offers to perform his part, and the other neglects or refuses to pniforru his, he who is ready and offers has fulfilled his en- gagement, and may maintain an action for the default of the other, though it is not certain that either is obliged to do the first act. The third sort is where either party may reeovcr damages from the other for the injuries he may have received by a breach of the covenants in his favor: and it is no excuse for the defendant to nliege a breiirh of the covenants on the part of the pliiintltf. Builev v White, 3 Ala. 330; Tompkins v. Elliot, 5 Wend. (N. Y.) 497; Gray v. Smith (C. C.) 76 Fed. 2734.

Principal and s.ux:i].laz'y; the former being thosc which relate directly to the principal matter of the contract entered into between the parties: while iiiixiiiarv covenants are those which do not relate directly to the principal matter of contract between the parties, but to something connected with it.

Inherent and collateral; the former being such us immediately affect the particular prop- erty, while the latter affect some property collateriii thereto or some matter coilateriii to the grant or lease. A covenant inherent is one which is conversant about the land, and knit to the estate in the innd; as. that the thing demised shall he quietly enjoyed, shall he kept in repair, or shall not he allened. A covensnt collateral is one which is conversant about some collateral thing that doth nothing at all, or not so immediately, concern the thing granted as to pay a sum of money in gross. etc. Shep. Touch. 161.

Joint or several. The former bind both or all the covenantors together; the intter hind each of them separately. A covenant may be both joint and several at the same time, as regards the covenantors; but, as regards the cove- nnntees, they cannot be joint and several for

one and the _same cause, (5 Coke, 1DrL,) but must

be either nt or several oniv Covenants are usually joint or several according as the interpsts of the coveniintees are such: but the words of the covenant, where they are unam- higuous, will decide, aithough, where they are ambiguous, the nature of the interests as being joint or several is left to decide. Brown. See

E

F

G

H

i

r-