Clark v. Nichols
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from Second District, Deer Lodge County, The court erred in hearing testimony on the matter of attorney fees, after having approved the finding of the jury as to the amount due on the note secured by the mortgage. The special issue submitted to the jury should have included all questions of fact raised; failure to do this was a virtual withdrawal of the same. Comales v. Leon, 31 Cal. 98 ; 23 id. 282. These questions may be reviewed without motion for new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Second District, Deer Lodge County, The court erred in hearing testimony on the matter of attorney fees, after having approved the finding of the jury as to the amount due on the note secured by the mortgage. The special issue submitted to the jury should have included all questions of fact raised; failure to do this was a virtual withdrawal of the same. Comales v. Leon, 31 Cal. 98 ; 23 id. 282. These questions may be reviewed without motion for new trial. Allen v. LLilf 16 Cal. 113. Facts must be found expressly, not impliedly. Breeze v. Doyle, 19 Cal. 101. There was no…
1Opinion of the CourtWade, C. J.
This is a suit in chancery to foreclose a mortgage. Special issues were submitted to a jury, who returned the same into court, and, among other things, found the amount due to the plaintiff from the defendant Nichols upon the note secured by the mortgage. In addition to the amount of the note, the complaint demanded a certain sum alleged to be due the plaintiff from the defendant upon a certain contract contained in the mortgage, whereby it was stipulated and agreed between the parties, that in case default be made in the pay-, ment of the note, or any part thereof, or interest thereon, and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Bank of Commerce v. FuquaMontana Supreme Court · 1891
- Burns v. PaulsenMontana Supreme Court · 1895