Wilhite v. Mason

*462The opinion of the court was delivered by

West, J.:

The plaintiff sued to recover on a thousand-dollar note and to foreclose a mortgage securing it, alleging that the maker, Mason, had by mistake drawn the instrument to come due two years-from September 1, 1912, instead of June 1, 1914,• as the parties agreed; and that the defendant Dieball had bought the property subject to the mortgage. The prayer was for reformation and judgment.

Dieball answered by verified denial, and claim of ownership and possession. There was no charge of fraud, the question being whether or not Dieball can be held by…