Lindbloom v. Kidston
District Court, D. Alaska
This is a suit to foreclose a mortgage given to the plaintiff, Erik O. Eindbloom, by William Kidston, one of the defendants, to secure the payment of a promissory note for $2,500, dated December 16, 1899, payable in gold coin, with 5 per cent, interest thereon in like gold coin one year from the date thereof.
Read the full summary
This is a suit to foreclose a mortgage given to the plaintiff, Erik O. Eindbloom, by William Kidston, one of the defendants, to secure the payment of a promissory note for $2,500, dated December 16, 1899, payable in gold coin, with 5 per cent, interest thereon in like gold coin one year from the date thereof. On the date of the said promissory note the said Kidston executed to said Eindbloom and delivered a deed for the placer mining claim described in the complaint, namely, claim No. 3 above discovery on Dry creek, in the Cape Nome recording district, containing 20 acres of land, more or…
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, District Judge.
It is apprehended that that portion of the evidence which is comprised in the Exhibit D now attached to the answer is the evidence upon which the defendants mainly rely to support their motion. This same Exhibit D is in fact the Exhibit A described in the defendants’ motion. There was no evidence at the. trial that Erik O. Eindbloom ever assumed to pay N. O. Hultberg the sum of $2,000, the amount of the purchase price still alleged to be due N. O. Hultberg; nor is it alleged in the proposed amendments to the defendants’ answer that it was so assumed.
The defendants, by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bayley v. GreenleafSupreme Court of the United States · 1822
- Frame v. SliterOregon Supreme Court · 1896