In re Irvine

I concur. Upon a more careful consideration of this case since its reargument, I am entirely satisfied that the conclusion reached in the foregoing opinion of Mr. Justice Harrison is correct, and that there is not such a substantial conflict in the evidence as to justify this court in sustaining the findings of the superior court upon that ground.

The decedent in his lifetime made a promissory note to Annie M. Bascom, for the sum of *607 $3,600, and to secure its payment made a mortgage upon certain lands in San Francisco, standing of record in his name. This mortgage was not placed of record until after the death of the mortgagor, and subsequent to its execution he made an agreement for the conveyance of the land to one Connolly. The money for which the note was made belonged to Eudora V. Smith, the petitioner herein, but for personal reasons the note and mortgage were executed to her mother, Mrs. Bascom. A claim upon the note and mortgage was presented to the administrator of the decedent’s estate, but was rejected, for the reason, as claimed by him, that there had been an agreement on the part of the petitioner for a reduction of the rate of interest, and also that there was an unadjusted claim against her in behalf of the estate for services as her attorney. No action was ever brought by her upon the claim after its reduction, nor did she ever present any other claim against the estate. Subsequent to the rejection of the claim, Connolly brought an action against the administrator for the performance of the aforesaid…