The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-06-08
8
OFFICIAL ADVERTISING

# had conveyed the property to Ber-
nard and taken new deed from him,
which would have left the title IN
plaintiff as it now stands. 1t was
not necessary to have these extra
deeds and ii they had been executed
they would not have varied the time
for bringing SUIT and the initiation OF
the running Of the statute which was
controlled by the last bond and the
Gate therein fixed and extended for
payment and reconveyance.
Plaintiff is forfeited with a writing
for all. that is awarded him by the
judgment and for more if the property !
IS worth more.
The loan and giving Of the security |
which vary the unconditional terms |
of the deed. and which are shown
verbally, are facts favorable to ap-
pellant which it would have been in
cunbent upon her to prove if plaintiff
had sued in ejectment for the prop
erty and introduced the deed. The
bringing Of the action four years
AID four months after January i, 1900,
the time fixed in the last bond for
reconFeyance conditioned on pay
nlent. vas rot too late.
Il IS also urged that suit was not
begun within the time required by
the provisions Of the Probate Act
after the rejection of the claim by
the eXeoutrix. Whether tbs is so is
+ lm-.ar,e...ai til although she as exc
curtr.x IS named as a party defendant,
the allegations Of the complaint and
the decree may be considered rs
running against the property only.
NC judgment for any deficiency after
sale or otherwise against the estate
is demanded or given by the decree,
which is directed only against the
premises and plaintiff rights to this
extent would not be curtailed nor
affected by failure 10 present claim
to the executr1, nor by her rejection
Of the claim filed, nor by his ON
mission to ste within the time pre-
scribed fer commencing actions on
rejected claims against estates OF de-
ceased persons, as is necessary when
il is desired to reach the assets OF
the estate.
In Cookies Y. CuIoerston, 9 New. cO7.
as here. deed was given as security
Ter a loan Whica was not evidenced
, in writing 1t was said in the opinion
THE remedy upon the debt IS barred
j, by the statute. but the deot was mo-
thereby extinguished: and as the
statute Of limitations Of this State
applies to suits in equity as well a:
actions at law, the creditors coult
have enforced payment by foreclosure
of the mortgage within four years
after the cause or action accrued
! He had two remedies. one upon tn
debt, the other upon the mortgage
by losing one he does not necessaril:
lose the other Since the rendition
e of the decision the time for commend
2 ing actions on written instrument
e has been extended from four to 81
e. years and under well recognize
o principles plaintiff was allowed tina
IL length Of time after the date fxe
- for payment of the $1,000 and for tn
termination Of the bond or re-co,
yeyance, which was January /, l9O
Sc AS said in Borden '. Glow. q Ne
or statute of limitations that the statu,
lit begins to run when the debt is du
st it, Under the argument tor appe
40 ant the four years from the final loa
l, payment Oh the $1,000 under the boz
e ON January /, 1900, would be d
be Quoted from the six years allow.
OF for bringing suit, and on that theo
at if tie maturity of the loan had be-
ha more than six years, instead OF TO
ne plaintiffs cause OF action would ha
-, been barred BEFORE it accrued.
i, The Judgment Of the District Cot
to is affirmed.
I'D TALBOT ]
= -
ay We concur.