Dixon v. Windsor

HORNSBY, Chief Justice.

The defendant, Alex Dixon, appeals the trial court’s ruling, based on ore tenus evidence, that a foreclosure by the plaintiff, H. Jack Windsor, was proper and that Dixon had failed to redeem his interest in the property within the one year allowed by statute for redemption.

Dixon and his late wife, Irene Dixon, borrowed $2,000 from George and Lillie Mae Quarles and they executed to the Quarleses a promissory note in that amount, due on February 23, 1989. As security for their indebtedness, the Dixons mortgaged certain land to the Quarleses.

Sometime in August 1988, the…