Las Vegas Railway & Power Co. v. Trust Co.

Citations

• 15 N.M. 634

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS.</p> <p>1. Examination of the record1 fails to disclose any proof that the court did not take full and complete proofs.</p> <p>2. A mere inference cannot he held to contradict a plain recital in the decree to the effect that certain things were duly and regularly done.</p> <p>3. Under articles of deed of trust the defaulting corporation should have, first, a written demand made upon them to cure any default, and then, a period of sixty days thereafter in which to devise ways and .meaps of overcoming such default. «</p> <p>4'. In the deed of trust there were no restrictions upon the rights and powers of the trustee to institute proceedings to foreclose such deed of trust.</p> <p>5. The complaint sufficiently states facts to constitute a cause of action as it properly and sufficiently alleges demand and requisition upon the trustee hy a majority of the bond holders.</p> <p>6. There was no such ’showing of fraud as would have warranted the court in vacating the decree of foreclosure.</p> <p>7. Not only is the price for which the property was1 sold, inadequate, hut there are also additional circumstance» which render it inequitable to permit the sale to stand. The purchaser is conceded to he a disinterested party and purchased in good faith. The sale should he set-aside and a new sale ordered therefore only upon terms.</p>