Pensoneau v. Pulliam

Citations

• 47 Ill. 58

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence—answer of a co-defendant in chancery—when may be used against another. An exception to the general rule that the answer of one co-defendant in chancery cannot be evidence against another, prevails in cases where the parties have a joint interest, either as partners, or otherwise, in the transaction to which the answer may relate.</p> <p>2. Mortgage—securities for money—or to indemnify—treated as mortgages— also promise to extend time of redemption. Courts of equity strongly incline to treat all securities for money, or to indemnify, as mortgages; and when a purchaser of lands, at or before a judicial sale, promises to extend the redemption beyond the time allowed by law, the transaction will be treated as a mortgage of the lands sold, the real right of the creditor extending no further than full satisfaction of his debt. All such cases, however, are controlled by the circumstances attending them.</p> <p>3. Same—agreement to extend the redemption—-no time fixed—what deemed a reasonable time. And where the time for redemption was not fixed upon by the parties, under an agreement extending it beyond the time allowed by law, the circumstances attending the transaction—as, the friendly relations between the parties, the constant enhancement of the value of the security by improvements thereon by the debtor, and the fact that the creditor was not pressing for payment—will be considered as justifying the debtor in not offering to perfect the redemption for nearly two years after the deed made.</p>