« ZurückWeiter »
STATUTES CITED, CONSTRUED, ETC.
Sec. 2495, 2496. Homestead. Orman v.
" 2499. Husband and wife. Richmond
v. Tibbles and Husband,
Husband and wife.
Richmond v. Tibbles and
2532, 2537. Alimony. Harshharger
v. Harshberger and Harsh.
“ 2533. Divorce. McEwen y. McEwen,
" 2537. Divorce. McEwen v. McEwen,
2011, 2012. Appeal. Cofin v. City
Council of Darenport, 518.
" 2667. Practice. Roberts v. Austin
Corbin & Co., 331.
* 2740. Limitation, statute of. stan-
ley V. Morse and Morse,
" 3742. Limitations, statute of. How-
ells v. Patton, 5%.
* 2757. Parties. Roberts v. Austin
Corbin & Co., 325.
" 2761. Parties. Turner v. Firet Na-
tional Bank of Keokuk, 563.
" 2764. Practice. Viele v. The Get.
mania Ins. Co., 45.
* 2764. Parties. Hosmer V. Burke,
" 2771. Parties. Mc Donald v. The
Chicago and Northwestern
Railroad Co., 110.
" 2771-2-3-4. Husband and wife. Rich.
mond v. Tibles and Hus.
v. Maxwell, 399.
46 2800. Venue. Suan v. Smith, 88.
Alimony. Harshberger v.
Harshberger and Harshber.
“ 2812. Original notice. McEwen v.
The Chicago. Rock Idand
and Peoria Railroad Co.,
Harshberger v. Harshberger
and Harshberger, 506.
v. Craig, 162.
v. Harshberger and Harek.
National Bank of Keokuk,
.. 2876. Demurrer. Miller y. Daison
& Conger, 187. Tumher v.
First National Bank of
Keokuk, 566. Orman
v. Austin Corbin & Co.,
Sec. 2917. Pleading. Viele v. The Ger- Sec. 3543. Practice. Roberts v. Austin
Corbin & Co., 331.
" 3670. Satisfaction of mortgage.
Deeter v. Crossley, 182.
" 3729. Bail bond forfeiture. Decatur
County v. Maxwell, 399.
"3766. Appeal. Coffin v. The City
Council of Davenport, 518.
" 3798. Injunction. Ewell v. Green-
3980, 3982. Evidence. Hosmer v.
* 3882. Evidence. Sykes v. Bates,
“ 3983. Evidence. Stanley v. Morse
and Morse, 456.
“ 4011. Criminal law. The State v.
4043, 4044. Service and return.
Brandt v. The Chicago,
R. I. & P. R. R. Co., 116.
Thornton, 81, The State v.
4191, 4193. Criminal law. The State
v. Newberry, 467.
" 4120. Highway The State
Van Houton, 402.
" 4394. Criminal law. The State v.
4593. Evidence. The State v. Hull,
4660, 4665. Criminal law. The State
v. Johnson, 416.
The State v.
Van Houton, 403.
5100, 5101. Criminal law. The State
v. Van Houton, 403.
comb v. Maloy, 445.
LAWS OF 1862.
Deeds v. Sanborn, 421.
79. Execution, Burton v. Ma-
lands. Baker v. Washing-
ton Co., 152.
169. $ 6.
Railroad. Daris v.
Burlington and Missouri
River R. R. Co., 551.
169. & 6. Service. Brandt v.
The Chicago, R. I. & P.
R. R. Co., 116.
Chap. 169. 87. Railroad. Hunt v. The Chap. 139. $$ 3, 4, 5. Administrator. Chicugo de N.W.R.R. Co.,
Shawhan F. Long, 192. 367.
LAWS OF 1868.
The State T. Chap. 60. Animal bounty scalps. The Chap. 18. Criminal law.
Van Houton, 402.
83. Corporation municipal. LAWS OF 1866.
Gruy v. The loue Land
Co., 392, Chap. 49. p. 433. Appeal. Coffin v. 99. Corporation municipal. City Council of Davenport,
Gray v. The loua Land 519.
SWAMP LANDS. 1. COUNTY AGENTS : ACT OF 1862. While it is competent for the board
of supervisors of a county to employ an agent to do the home work in the selection of swamp lands, such as procuring witnesses, taking and preparing proofs showing the swampy character of the land, and the like, it has no power, in view of chapter 160, acts of 1862, to bind the county by the employment of an agent to attend upon the federal departments for the purpose of securing the allowance
of the county's claim. Baker v. Washington County, 148. 2. The provisions of said chapter contemplate that this business at the
federal departments is to be transacted by State agents alone, appointed as provided in said act. Id.
TAXES AND TAX SALE. 1. SCHOOL FUND MORTGAGE. The county authorities of a county can
not, for the use of the school fund, buy in an outstanding tax title for the purpose of defeating the lien of a mortgage held by a third party, and which is prior to one existing on the same land, in favor
of the fund. Miller v. Gregg et al., 75. 2. WHEN A LIEN: WARRANTY DEED. Under chapter 10, acts of the
ninth general assembly, taxes for the current year are not, as between the vendor and purchaser, a lien upon real estate sold under contract made prior to the 1st of November of such year; and the vendor is not liable upon the covenants of his deed for the premises, executed after that time, but in pursuance of such contract made before. Sackett v. Osborn et al., 146.
TENANCY IN COMMON. 1. OF A CHOSE IN ACTION : TROVER. The owner of a promissory note
may sell distinct shares thereof to different persons, who thus become co-owners. The interest thus acquired by one co-owner is such as to enable him to protect it by an action; and he may main. tain trover if another co-owner be guilty of conversion. Conover v.
Earl, 167. 2. OF CHATTELS: CONVERSION. One part owner of a chattel is as much
entitled to the possession thereof as the other, and the refusal of one to deliver possession of the chattel to the other, does not amount
to a conversion. Following Franz v. Young, 24 Iowa, 375. Id. 3. REMEDY. It seems that a co-owner of a promissory note might main
tain an action for partition, or in equity, making the other part owners and the debtor parties. Id.
VENDOR AND VENDEE. 1. CONTRACT : CONVEYANCE: MISTAKE. Where a vendee purchases a
tract of land at a certain price per acre, and receives a deed there.