
    HARRIS et ux. v. SUTHERLAND (BOX, Intervener).
    No. 12,655;
    December 4, 1888.
    19 Pac. 701.
    Mortgage—Deed Absolute—Weight of Evidence.—A decree deciding that a deed absolute on its face is not a mortgage will not be disturbed, on appeal, where the evidence is conflicting.
    APPEAL from Superior Court, Fresno County; J. B. Campbell, Judge.
    Action by C. C. Harris and Pattie A. Harris, his wife, against William Sutherland, to redeem land from an absolute conveyance made by plaintiffs to defendant, which plaintiffs allege to be a mortgage. A. J. Box intervened, claiming the land as an innocent purchaser from Sutherland. The court held the instrument to be a deed, and not a mortgage. Plaintiffs appeal.
    Hinds & Merriam for appellants; E. D. Edwards for defendant and respondent; C. G. Sayle for intervener and respondent.
   FOOTE, C.

This case turns upon the point as to whether or not the evidence is sufficient to warrant the court below in finding that a certain instrument in writing made by the plaintiff to Sutherland, the defendant, was intended to be a deed, and not a mortgage. The evidence is conflicting, and the finding should be upheld. We advise that the judgment and order be affirmed.

We concur: Belcher, C. C.; Hayne, C.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment and order are affirmed.  