Sharpe v. Lees

• Decision Date: 28 May 1912
• Citation: 62 Or. 506,123 P. 1071
• Parties: SHARPE et al. v. LEES et al.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

123 P. 1071

62 Or. 506

SHARPE et al. v. LEES et al.

Supreme Court of Oregon

May 28, 1912

Appeal from Circuit Court, Malheur County; Dalton Biggs, Judge.

Suit by Isaac W. Sharpe and another against William E. Lees and another. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Defendants purchased at a foreclosure sale certain lands owned by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs allege that their statutory right to redeem from such sale expired on September 7, 1910, and that before the statutory period for such redemption, defendants agreed to extend the time of redemption for five days, and agreed that, if plaintiffs would pay the money necessary to so redeem within that time, they would not take a deed to the property and would cancel all obligations against plaintiffs. Relying upon such promises, plaintiffs, on September 10 1910, tendered the money necessary to redeem, which defendants refused to accept, and, in violation of their agreement, defendants took a deed to the property in their own name on September 8, 1910, and refused to allow plaintiffs to redeem. Defendants joined issue on these allegations, and upon the trial there were findings and a decree for defendants. Plaintiffs appeal.

J.C Johnston (A.J. Hurley and J.F. Colvin, on the brief), for appellants.

Wm. E Lees, of Ontario (George E. Davis, of Canyon City, on the brief), for respondents.

McBRIDE J. (after stating the facts as above).

We do not think that plaintiffs have established the agreement to extend the time by the clear preponderance of the evidence. The testimony in favor of plaintiffs' contention is given by plaintiffs and Colvin, their attorney, and Mr. Eby, who was interested in getting a loan of $18,000 for the use of plaintiffs. It consists of alleged declarations of defendant Lees, when applied to for an extension, to the effect that "five or six days would make no difference, and that if they had the money there by that time it would be alright," and of alleged declarations of Blackaby that what Lees did would be satisfactory to him. These declarations are absolutely denied by both defendants, and in addition, we have the testimony of Mr. Mulky, the county clerk, to the effect that witness Colvin came to him on September 7th, the last day for the redemption, and stated that the money to redeem might be wired there that night, and asked him to stay up late, in order to assist in the redemption, saying that it was the...