Harris v. Sutherland
HARRIS et ux. v. SUTHERLAND (BOX, Intervener)
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Foote (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Foote
FOOTE, C.
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.
PER CURIAM.
For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment and order are affirmed.