Show I SuP EME COtflIT OPINION lDr J F frtillspaugh Wins His Appeal S Ap-peal Case The sl1pr jncurt landed down an PPiriion ni the case of the Salt Lake Valley Loan Trust company va I J F IlIIspaugh et at appellants in which the judgment of the lower court is reversed re-versed The appellants borrowed from the respondent 4000 and gave their i promissory note for the same secured by a trust deed to three pieces of property On April 15 1893 the ap I pelIants sold the property to A J Schlager for 15000 SOCO of which was paid for lot 3 block 21 plat F covered I by the trust deed and the same was sold sUbJect to the trist deed Afterwards After-wards lot 3 was sold for 22iO and the amount credited on the note and the lot released from the trust deed however without the appellants bBjng consulted In the matter The balance of the property was afterwards sold and the proceeds applied on the note and still a balance of 9853 was left dUe Plaintiff then sued the defendant defend-ant Iillspaugh for that sum and got judgment in the district court The supreme court reversed thIs and granted grant-ed a new trial holding that the burdeon of proof as to the value of the property sold was upon the plaintiff and that It erred by not introducing testimony in that regard Ullspauh ought alserto have been notified of the release of the property from the trust deed after the sale and nls consent obtained The opinion was written by Justice Miner and concurred in by Chief Justice Jus-tice Zane and Justice Bartch I |