Burdick v. Wentworth
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Howard District Court. Action for the purpose of determining whether the plaintiff or defendant has the better title to the real estate described in petition. A deed executed simply for the purpose of giving security should be treated as a mortgage.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Howard District Court. Action for the purpose of determining whether the plaintiff or defendant has the better title to the real estate described in petition. A deed executed simply for the purpose of giving security should be treated as a mortgage. (Richardson v. Barrich, 16 ■Iowa, 407; Trueles v. Lindsey, 18 Id., 504; Garruthers’ Admdrs v. Hunt, 18 Id., 576.) The doctrine that time is of the essence of the contract does not apply to mortgages or title bonds which take the place of mortgages, for the title remains in the mortgagor, and he cannot be divested except by voluntary…
1Opinion of the Court
Seevers, Ch. J.
The facts briefly are as follows: On the 10th day of April, A. D. 1857, Elizabeth Ilallett borrowed about two hundred dollars of the defendant, with which she entered the land in controversy, and on the same day conveyed the premises to the defendant; such conveyance was duly recorded on the 4th day of June, A.D. 1857. For the money borrowed, Elizabeth Ilallett gave the defendant her note, payable with ten per cent interest in one year. The, defendant gave to her a bond, whereby he agreed to convey the premises to *442her upon the payment of the note and all taxes; time being 'made…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Page v. ColeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858
3Cited by5 opinions
- Boynton v. SalingerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Haggerty v. BrowerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Collier v. SmaltzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Warner v. TullisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Richards v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879