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

loaned $500 to William Bernard, now
deceased. and 10 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 deed
whereby he agreed to recOnvey the
property on or before February Is,
F. 1898, provided that he was paid on or
before that date $500, and also $50
annually. On February 5, 1896 plant
if loaned Bernard tne additional sum
Of $500 and accepted as securtty 1ol
$1,000, ana interest a deed naue
% n,aintitf Al 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 8, 1895,
conditioned that plaintiff would make
and deliver a good and sufficient con
yeyance 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
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 We're 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. 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 %. 1898. There
is testimony indicating that she had
previously recognized the demand by
sndeavoring to borrow money for its
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
closeure and sale of the premises 10
satisfy the amount. $1731.2o ana
x764O costs. found due to plaintiff,
she appeals.
The we'll settled doctrine that a
deed executed merely for the purpose
of securing a debt will be construed
as mortgage IS not assailed, but for
appellant it is cOntended that as sun
was not brought until April, 1904
more than six years after the las'
loan and the giving OF the last poho
on February s. 1896. and more tha1
four years after the time, Januar! l
,ooo txed tor a conveyance there
under conditioned on payment, the
action is barred by the statute o.
limitations. 1t IS s2id 'ii''
bv executing written release OIL .n'
first bond and accepting new ont
instead, at the time he borrowed
the last amount. 5000. Bernard die
not sign any, writing agreeing ITO
pay or acknowledging a debt. ane
that therefore. the obligation to pa.
on his part was merely verbal ant
would be barred in four years. w
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 til
parties. but are, not for that reaso
verbal nor half verbal. Although Be-
nard executed no note or writin
agreeing to paye any money, he signe
q deed absolute in terms conveyin
the property to plaintiff, and by th1
suit and the decree no more IS sougt
than he under his signature obligate
himself to yield. In equity the e:
. tension of the time for reconve
ance by plaintiff, given by the su
render of the first bond and the e
ecution of a new one ought to |
considered as effective as if plain
III had conveyed the property to Be
nard and taken new deed from hir