First Nat. Bank of McGregor v. Eiseman

Fifth Circuit

First Nat. Bank of McGregor v. Eiseman

246 F. 597, 158 C.C.A. 567, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1383

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 17, 1917

DocketNo. 3032

StatusPublished

This text of 246 F. 597 (First Nat. Bank of McGregor v. Eiseman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

First Nat. Bank of McGregor v. Eiseman, 246 F. 597, 158 C.C.A. 567, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1383 (5th Cir. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The success of the claim asserted by the appellant in this case is dependent upon its supporting allegations to the effect that a conveyance made by John F. Gulledge of his homestead property was not absolute and unconditional, as, on its face, it purported to be, but was made to secure an indebtedness owing by him to his grantee. The trial court made a finding that the instrument in question was not a mortgage, but was an absolute and unconditional conveyance of Gulledge’s title and interest. Our conclusion is that the evidence is not such as to warrant this court in setting aside that finding. To say the least, it is not clearly made to appear that that finding waé an improper one.

The decree appealed from is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The success of the claim asserted by the appellant in this case is dependent upon its supporting allegations to the effect that a conveyance made by John F. Gulledge of his homestead property was not absolute and unconditional, as, on its face, it purported to be, but was made to secure an indebtedness owing by him to his grantee. The trial court made a finding that the instrument in question was not a mortgage, but was an absolute and unconditional conveyance of Gulledge’s title and interest. Our conclusion is that the evidence is not such as to warrant this court in setting aside that finding. To say the least, it is not clearly made to appear that that finding waé an improper one.

The decree appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 F. 597, 158 C.C.A. 567, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-nat-bank-of-mcgregor-v-eiseman-ca5-1917.