In case of a release of right and title, cove- nants limited to those claiming under the grantor do not prevent the assertion by the grantor of a subsequently acquired title; 26 N. H. 401; 4 Wend. 800; 5 Gray 328; 11 Ohio 475; 14 Me. 351; 48 id. 482; 14 Cal. 472. It is a real covenant, and runs with the estate in respect to which it is made, into the hands of whoever becomes the owner; 2 Washb. R. P. 659; Chal. R. P. 279; 4 Sneed 52; 82 Va. 702; 40 La. Ann. 827; against the covenantor and his personal representa- tives; 27 Pa. 288; 8 Zabr. 260; see 142 Ν. Y. 78; to the extent of assets received, and cannot be severed therefrom; 18 Ired. 193. The covenant of warranty and that of seisin or of right to convey are not equiva- lent covenants. Defect of title will sustain an action upon the latter, while disturbance of possession is requisite to recover upon the former; 131 U.S. 75. Grantors hav- ing made an express contract of warranty, cannot set up knowledge of vice in their title, to exonerate themselves from the ob- ligation of their contract; 138 U. S. 595. The action for breach should be brought by the owner of the land and, as such, as- signee of the covenant at the time it is broken; 4 Johns. 89; 19 Wend. 334; 2 Mass. 455; 7 id. 444; 8 Cush. 219; 10 Me. 81; 5 Τ. B. Monr. 357; 12 N. H. 413; but may be by the original covenantee, if he has satisfied the owner; 5 Cow. 187; 8 Cush. 222; 5 Т. B. Monr. 357; 1 Conn. 244; 1 Dev. & B. 94; 10 Ga. 311; 26 Vt. 279. To constitute a breach there must be an eviction by paramount title; Rawle, Cov. § 181; 6 Barb. 165; 5 Harr. Del. 162; 11 Rich. 80; 13 La. Ann. 390, 499; 5 Cal. 262; 4 Ind. 174; 6 Ohio St. 525; 26 Mo. 92; 17 III. 185; 36 Me. 455; 14 Ark. 309; 35 Neb. 521; 26 S. W. Rep. (Tex). 443;41 Vt. 296; which may be constructive; 12 Me. 499; 17 III. 185; 86 id. 69; and it is sufficient if the tenant yields to the true owner, or if, the premises being vacant, such owner takes possession; 5 Hill 599; 4 Mass. 349; 8 Ill. 162; 5 Ired. 393; 40 Minn. 94; 98 N. C. 239; 40 La. Ann. 827; 39 Cal. 360; 33 N. J. L. 328. See 4 Halst. 139. But in such case the grantee must prove the existence and assertion of such paramount, outstanding, hostile title; 16 Or. 388; 51 III. 377; 47 Ind. 256; 66 Me. 557; 108 Mass. 276; 40 Vt. 43; and assume the burden of proof with as much particu- larity as if suing in ejectment; Rawle, Cov. § 136; 32 Ia. 76; 51 Tex. 178; unless the adverse right has been established by a judgment or decree in a suit of which the covenantor had been properly notified; Rawle, Cov. § 136; in which case the judg- ment or decree will be conclusive evidence of the validity of the paramount title; id. See id. § 123 et seq. Exercise of the right of eminent domain does not render the covenantee liable; 31 Pa. 37; 71 id. 83; 25 Cal. 452; 10 Cush. 134; 3 Wheat. 452. When the covenantee is threatened with eviction, it is usual and proper for him to give notice to the covenantor to appear and defend the suit. If it appears on the record that the covenantor received the notice or if he defends the suit, recovery therein will be conclusive against him in an action by the covenantee; otherwise the question of notice will go to the jury on the facts. If no notice was given, the record of the adverse suit is not even prima facie evi- dence that the adverse title was paramount. Notice of the adverse suit is not indispen- sable to a recovery against the covenantor; Rawle, Cov. § 125. As to the measure of damages for an eviction, see MEASURE OF DAMAGES.