Harris

Harris v. Sutherland

Good Law
3 Cal. Unrep. 34·19 P. 701
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 4, 1888No. 12,655California86 words

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

This case turns upon the point as to whether or not the evidence is sufficient to warrant the court below in finding that a certain instrument in writing made by the plaintiff to Sutherland, the defendant, was intended to be a deed, and not a mortgage. The evidence is conflicting, and the finding should be upheld. We advise that the judgment and order be affirmed.

We concur: Belcher, C. C.; Hayne, C.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment and order are affirmed.