The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-06-14
Decision

=, February IS, 1922, tne piainlt
.<aaed $500 to William Bernard, nc"
taraased. and 70 secure the payment
-re-act he decided to plaintiff On tna-
Sgy IRE lands described in tie COM
-.aLnt, and at the same time paint + ,
=rac-Itad- ~ him BOND To- dead
Whereby ae agreed to re-convey the
s-eperty on or before February IS,
-5's, provided that he was paid on CT
-.eanre tha. date $500, and also SIS
s-nuaily. On February s, 1895 plail--
&. l3aned Bernard the additional. sum
" $500 ard accepted as security To-
r-Go1. ana interest deed made
:, 7laiutit az the time tie $3.50 was
ssz-rowed, and ~ release made il
=1-irg acknowledged aai recorded,
Barnard then relieved him from al
-2|gations resulting from the bond
=sfa February IS, 1893, AMI taere-
r-y1a plaintiff executed to Bernard 4
Nv aond, dated February s. 1895.
..y1fitioned hat plaintiff would make
EzG deliver good and sufficient con
1ega1ca Of the property 70 Bernard.
s-r3riItd Plaintiff was paid $1,000 On
n before January l, 1900 AMI also
70 annually, and further provtsio1ed
a4ac i Bernard paid these amounts
xz5 The taxes he would be entitled to
Z receipt and the statement Or dd-
--sszlnn of Bernard q short time be-
ZaE MS death indicate thai the -on,.
rxv.lents we're on Interest to the
w. DAY Of February 1897. He died
"a anGDXins year and letters test
,-r.sgEyary were issued 10 his wido"
L.. Harriet Bernard who has s-nce
rasried G. j. O-th. Plaintiff de-
r8rd arising out of the above tran
.sclous vas presented against the
rpa-e and by her as executr!, was
,y.5esled on August %. 1898. There
=. testimony indicating that she LAD
r-~4iousIy recognized the demand by
s.rsssayo ring to borrow money for us
,srr,ent On July "a, 1901 the prop
Ky vas set over to her By decree
u distribution From a judgment de-
v@ing the deed to plaintiff to be
az Urrgage and ordering fore
,szsu-e. ard sale Of the premises TO
H-fssy the amount, slI31.25 and
Es4y costs. found due to plaintiff
Ea appeals.
,Tta well settled doctrine that a
<e=3 executed merely for the purpose
y securing a debt will be construed
r= . mortgage IS not assailed, but fol
s-yel,ant it is commended that as sui
a rot brought until April. 1904
-sra Than six yeas after the las
;xaa and the giving Of the lest poni
~ Eehruary s, 1895. and more INA.
EGG years after the time, January
-7,,- Iyna tor conveyance there
Efe- conditioned on payment, tn
z--Sc.a IS barred by the statute O
Tsr71orian= 1t is SAID tina
~ executing a written release OF II
@-~t BOND and accepting new On
v-stSa3, at the time he horrowe
&c last amount. $500, Bernard CT
wg. sign any writing agreeing L
jag OF acknowledg dying a debt. an
aalsE therefore the obligation to pa
sz mis- part was merely verbal an
EnaEd be barred in four years. "
% not so view that transaction Mo:
instrument in daily use, such as deeG
Hartgages, notes, orders, drafts ar
osssks are signed by only one Of II
2aE'ss,but are not for that reasI
vexeal ncr half verbal. Although Be
ls1d executed no note or writ.1
agreeing to pay any money. he signt
Il 1eed absolute in terms conveyil
lie property to pla.ntlff. and by tn
~. and the decree no more is soug
Es7 he under his signature obligat
ENs.eH to yield. In equity the {
eHHs;..1 of the time for a recOnv<
zD,7: py plaintiff, given by the 81
zeGke- Of the first bond and the {
sHsIm of a new one orsnt TO
~m-<;dorod &c oHoctivo as if nloi