Opinion

Pollak v. Millsap

  • 219 Ala. 273
  • 122 So. 16
  • 65 A.L.R. 110
  • 1928 Ala. LEXIS 391
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed
Nov 15, 1928
Status
Published
Author
Bouldin
On the bench
Anderson, Bouddin, Bouldin, Foster, Gardner, Saxre, Thomas
Cited by
28 cases

holding that transaction involving loan of money se cured by deed is enforceable as mortgage, not a conditional sale

How later courts described this case

  • holding that transaction involving loan of money se cured by deed is enforceable as mortgage, not a conditional sale

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

BOULDIN, J.

I concur in the opinion, but would not be understood as agreeing that parol evidence may be received to the effect that the transaction was a mere option to reclaim the land at the maturity of the note.

*280

The writing does not provide for any cancellation of the debt or surrender of the note on delivery of the deed. If it were silent as to this, it might be open to parol evidence. But it is not silent. The same writing expressly declares that after maturity, after the date for delivery of the deed under the contract, suit may be brought on the note, and the maker will pay the plaintiff’s attorney’s fees. No suit could be brought until after the date named for the delivery of the deed.

I therefore reserve for future inquiry any question of the right to vary these provisions by parol — a matter which is not discussed in the opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.