The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-05-14
Decision

Aaned $500 to William Bernard, now
deceased, and to secure the payment
thereof he decided to plaintiff on that
DAY the lands described in the COM
Hiaint, and at the same time plaintiff
executed to him bond for a deed
whereby he agreed to re-convey the
Ncperty on or before February is,
a39S, provided that he was paid on or
oefore that date $500, and also SIG
annually. On February 8, 1896 plant
III loaned Bernard the additional sum
Of $500 aud accepted as security for
$1,000. ana interest a deed made
60 plaintiff at the time the $500 was
Borrowed, and by release made in
writing Acknowledged and recorded,
scrIraId then relieved him from all
obligations resulting from the bond
made February IS, 1893, and there
upon plaintiff executed TO Bernard a
A"" bOi4E, Udleu ISDIudTy ., 1890,
conditioned that plaintiff would make
and deliver a good and sufficient con
veyance Of the property to Bernard,
provided Plaintiff was paid $1,000 on
Or before January /, 1900 and also
$50 annually, and further provisioned
shat if Bernard paid these amounts
and the taxes he would be entitled to
che use and possession of the premises
q receipt and the statement or adj
mission of Bernard a short time be-
fore his death indicate that the only
payments We're on interest to the
9Th day of February 1897. He died
,he following year and letters test
Mrs. Harriet Bernard who has s.nce
married C. J. Ortiz Plaintiffs de-
nand arising out Of the above tran
sactions was presented against the
estate and by her as executrlx was
rejected on August %. 1898. There
Is testimony indicating that she had
previously recognized the demand by
endeaycrtng 10 borrow money for It's
payn1ent. On July "a, 1901 the prop
erty was set over to her by decree
af distribution. From a judgment de-
creeing the deed to plaintiff to pc
. mortgage and ordering Aoie
obscure and sale of the premises 10
.o+;sfv the amount. $l131.25 anu
s7s.4o costs. found due to plain''n'
she appeals.
The well settled doctrine that a
deed executed merely for the purpose
of ACQUIRING a debt will be construed
,s mortgage IS not assalled, put lol
,,nal1ant il is contended that as sun
.s not brought until April, l9o4
moro than six years after the lbs
,oan and the giving Of the last ooh'
rabruarv S. 1896. and more 'ha'
~o,r wears after the time, Jahu''As
,aoo fixed tor conveyance ''e'
under conditioned on payment th'
,ction is barred by the statute
,.;+a,;one It is said ina
oc,,t;ro written release OF tn
fret bond and accepting a ne" on
instead. at the time he borroWe
tha last amount. 5000, Bernard dl
NOT sign any writing agreeing u
NAV or acknowledging debt, an
chat therefore the obligation to pa
on his part was merely verbal an
would be barred in four years. W
do not SC view that transaction. MO
instrument in daily use, such as deee
mortgages, notes, orders, drafts ar
checks are signed by only one OF tt
parties but are not for that reast
verbal nor half verbal. Although Be
nard executed no note or WITH
agreeing to pay any money, he slgn'
p deed absolute IN Terms coA'o II
the property to plaintiff, and by IL
suit and the decree no more IS sonS
than he under his signature obilgat
nluseeif to yield. In equity the
ten Of the time for a reconVe
am ~ plaintiff, given BY the s.
l., Grct hnnd and the
e.4Iion of a new one oIoAt to
considered as effective as il plal
if had conveyed the property to B
nard and taken new deed from III