Legal Opinion

United States Building & Loan Ass'n v. Burns

Montana Supreme Court

Decided October 10, 1931No. 6,801PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Callaway

We hold that the note, mortgage and assignment of rents and revenues, were constituent parts of one transaction. Upon tbe facts that is so, and no refinement of argument can make it otherwise. The statute says that several contracts relating to the same matter, and made as parts substantially of one transaction, are to be taken together. (Sec. 7533, Rev. Codes 1921.) And, as the parts of this transaction referred to above, are to be taken together, they must be considered together for all purposes. (United States Nat. Bank v. Chappell, 71 Mont. 553, 230 Pac. 1084; Cooper v. Goble, 77 Mont.…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Miller v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  2. Paine v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
  3. County of Glenn v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Gay v. Lavina State BankMontana Supreme Court · 1921
  5. O'Hanlon v. Ruby Gulch Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1922

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Kintner v. HarrMontana Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Williard v. CampbellMontana Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Herigstad v. Hardrock Oil Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Chamberlain v. EvansMontana Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Herrin v. HerrinMontana Supreme Court · 1936

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API