The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-03-17
supreme Court Decisions.
Special Dispatch to the Standard.

Special Dispatch to the Standard.
Helena, March 16.-The supreme
court to-day in an opinion by Associate
Justice Dewitt, decided that the stat
ute extending the time for the redemp-
ton on mortgage foreclosure sales from
six months to one year Is not unconsti-
tutional as to mortgages executed while
the old law was in existence, as il does
not impair the obligation of the con-
tract. but effects the remedy only. The
decision is of vast Importance to the
state. The question came up I'm the case
of the state ex rel. the Thomas Cruise
Savings Bank, appellant, VS.. Alexander
p. Gillian, as sheriff of Jefferson coun-
ty, respondent; from Jefferson county,
which is an appeal from the Judgment
of the district court rendered in favor
of the respondent, upon Diminishing the
REALTORS application for a writ of man
damus. The relator in the district
court asked for a writ commanding the
respondent, who was sheriff of Jeffer-
son county, to execute and deliver to
him a deed of real estate sold upon
Judgment by foreclosing a mortgage
upon the same. The petition set forth
that on Jan. 5, 1892, c.. S. Kennedy and
wife executed to the relator, to secure
an indebtedness, a mortgage upon the
real estate described in the petition:
that on March g. 1895 the relator COM
menced action of foreclosure, In which
action Judgment was rendered July 2.
1895. The sale took place Aug. g. 1895,
and six months afterward, on Feb. 4,
1896. the relator demanded a deed on
the respondent sheriff, who refused to
make the deed on the grounds that the
time for redemption was one year, in
stead of six months on July l, 1895,
the law went into effect which made
the redemption one year. The sheriff
stood upon the statute as enacted and
refused to make the deed. The appel
liant contended that the statute of July
1. 1895. was unconstitutional and void.
in that IL was enacted after the mort
gage was given, and thus impaired the
obligation of the contract
The supreme court, in concluding its
opinion, says: Having satisfied our
selves that the question before us Is
practically settled against the relator
by the decision of the United States
court in dismissing the petition of writ
of mandamus, we shall hold directly
upon the merits, that the sheriff's deed
i'm this case can be demanded only at
the expiration of one year after the
sale"
Two other cases were decided as fol-
lows: Jacob Engesser VS.. the Northern
Pacific Railroad Co: from Gallatin county
Engesser, the appellant, appeared before
the supreme court by brief filed by r.
p Caldwell, who was subsequently dis
barred from the practice of law. The SUI
preme court says: we do not feel that
IL is the duty of the court to consider APP
peals where the appellants contention Is
presented solely by the brief of an attor-
ney who has been disbarred for dishonor-
able and unprofessional conduct. The
Judgment is therefore affirmed" If the
appellant within GO days shows good cause
for reinstatement of the appeal the court
will take IL up again.
Ellen NJ. Stebbins. appellant. VS.. Rob-
ert o. Morris, respondent; from Park
county. The judgment of the lower court
is affirmed, as appellants brief, submit
ted by L. p. Caldwell. will not be consid-
cred. The appellant may upon presenta-
ton of her cause, have her case rein
stated.