The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-05-16
Decision

On February 1S 1888, the plaintiff
loaned 500 to William Bel lard, now
deceased, and to secure the Payment
thereof he decided to plaintlit on 'hat
day the lands described in the COM
executed to him bond for a deed
whereby he agreed 10 re-conyey the
property on or before February Is,
1888, provided that he was paid on or
before that date $500, and also $50
annually. On February S, 1896 paint
If loaned Bernard the additional sum
of 5000 and accepted IS security for
$1,000. and interest a deed made
20 plaintiff a. 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
made February is, 1898, and there
upon plaintiff executed to Bernard a
new bond, dated February S, 1896,
conditioned that plainti1 would make
and deliver a good and sufficient con
veyance of the property 10 Bernard,
provided Plaintiff was paid $1,000 on
or before January /, 1900 and also
$50 annually, and further provisioned
that if Bernard paid these amounts
and the taxes he would be entitled to
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 s.nce
married G.. j. Orth. Plaintiffs de-
mand arising out of the above tran
sactions was presented against the
estate and by her as executrix was
rejected on August 80. 1898. There
is testimony indicating that she had
previously recognized the demand by
endaayoring to borrow money Tor It's
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
mortgage and ordering fore.
obscure and sale of the premises to
satisfy the amount, S1131.2o and
s76.4O costs. found due to plalntf
she appeals.
The well settled doctrine that a
deed executed merely for the purpose
Of securing a debt will be construed
as a mortgage IS not assailed, but fol
appellant it is contended that as sui
was not brought until April, 1904
more than six years after the las
loan anu the giving OF the last bone
on February 8, 1896. and more thai
four wears after the time, January
1900 fixed Tor q conveyance lheie
under conditioned on payment, thu
action is barred by the statute o
limitations. It is said lha
by executing a written release Of tn
first bond and accepting a new on
instead. at the time he borrowe
the last amount. $500, Bernard dit
not sign any writing agreeing tC
pay or acknowledging a debt, ant
that therefore the obligation to pa.
on his part was merely verbal an
would be barred in four years. "
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 th
parties but are not for that reaso
verbal nor half verbal. Although Be
nard executed no note or writ.n
agreeing to pay any money, he signe
deed absolute in terms cOnveyin
the property to plaintiff, and by tn
suit and the decree no more IS sougl
than he under his signature obigate
himself to yield. In equity the e
ten i of the time for a reconve
an by plaintdf, given by the su
re:.:u of the first bond and the e
ecurion of a new one oLslt. to
considered as effective as if plain
if had conveyed the property to Be
nard and taken new deed from hil