The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-06-11
Decision

Decision
On February Is, 1893, the plaintiff
loan ID $500 to William Bernard, nov
dec "a led, and to secure the payment
thereof he decided to plaintiff on that
day the lands described in the COM
plant, and at the same time plaintiff
executed to him a bond for a deed
whereby he agreed to re-convey the
property on or before February Is,
1898, provided that he was paid on or
before that date $500, and also s36
annually. On February 8, 1896 plant
if loaned Bernard the additional sum
Of $500 and accepted as security for
$1,000. and interest deed made
to plaintiff at the time the $500 was
borrowed, and by release made in
writing acknowledged and recorded,
Bernard then relieved him from all
Obligations resulting from the bond
-h"US GU Od4S 40, 1879, duu tueie
upon plaintiff executed to Bernard a
new bond, dated February 8. 1896,
conditioned that plaintiff would make
a: ie.iver a good and sufficient con
veyance Of the property to Bernard,
provided Plaintiff was paid $1,000 on
or before January l, 1900 and also
$50 annually, and further provisioned
that if Bernard paid these amounts
the use and possession of the premises
A receipt and the statement or ad-
mission of Bernard a short time be-
fore his death indicate that the only
payments were on interest to the
sth. day of February 1897. He died
the following year and letters test
amentary were issued to his widow
Mrs. Harriet Bernard who has since
married c. ]. O7th. Plaintiffs de-
mand arising QUIZ of the above tran
sactions was esented against the
estate and by her as executrix was
rejected on August 20. 1898. There
! o<t,mony indicating that she had
r-eviLa-l II recognized the demand oy
ayoring to borrow money Tor us
payment. On July "a. 1901 the prop
erty was set over to her by decree
of distribution. From a Judgment de-
creeing the deed to plaintiff to be
a mortgage and ordering a fore
obscure and sale of the premises to
satisfy the amount. $1731.25 and
. S76.4O costs. found due to plaintin'
she appeals.
The we'll settled doctrine that
deed executed merely for the purpose
of securing a debt will be construed
as q mortgage IS not assailed, but fol
appellant it is commended that as sui
was not brought until April, l9o4
more than siA years after the las'
loan aud the .:.lAg Of the last pone
~, Eabruarv J. $50, and more thar
t,ur wears after the time, January l
1900 fixed tor u Veyahce 'neie
under conditioned on payment, the
action is barred by the statute 0
limitations. 1t is said INA
by executing a written release OF tn
first bond and accepting new on
instead, at the time he borfowe
the last amount. $500. Bernard ii,
not sign any writing agreeing te
pay or acknowledging a debt, az
that therefore the obligation to pa
on his part was merely verbal an
would be barred in four years. y
do not so view that transaction Mos
instrument in daily use. such as deed
mortgages. notes. orders. drafts an
checks are signed by only one OF tn
parttes.but are not for that reasu
verbal nor half verbal. Although Be
nard executed no note or writiu
agreeing to pay any money. he signe
q deed absolute in terms conveyir
the property to pla.ntlff. and by tn
suit and the decree no more Is sougI
Tho, he rnder his signature obligatl
n,".,eH to yield. In equity the e
: teh>iCn Of the time for . rec0nve
ance py plaintiff, given by the 81
rende. Of the first bond and the e
ecurion of . new one oukht to