Supreme Court of Tennessee
186 S.W. 121 (1916)
Pritchard (plaintiff) purchased real property adjacent to a railroad line from Rebori (defendant). Both parties examined the land prior to purchase and believed that a fence constructed by the railroad company represented the boundary line of the railroad right-of-way. Rebori gave Pritchard a deed that described the boundaries of the conveyed parcel as extending to the railroad right-of-way based upon the location of the fence. After the purchase, Pritchard discovered that the actual railroad right-of-way line extended into the parcel described in the deed. Pritchard purchased other land and conveyed it to the railroad in exchange for the property lying within the right-of-way. Pritchard filed suit seeking damages for breach of warranty against encumbrances. The trial court ruled in favor of Pritchard. Rebori appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Williams, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 203,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.