Legal Opinion

Murnan v. Schuldt

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided February 20, 1936No. 43150PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, J.

This is an appeal from a nunc pro tunc order correcting tlie amount of a judgment. We are not favored either with an appearance or a brief and argument on the part of the appellee. It would seem that the ease is of enough importance to warrant us in saying that this neglect is inexcusable.

It appears from the record that the plaintiff-appellee brought an action, aided by landlord’s attachment, for rent upon two promissory notes for $540 and $900, respectively; that on November 16, 1932, the matter came on before the lower court for trial, and the following entry was made in the court calendar:…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hofacre v. City of MonticelloSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
  2. Doughty v. MeekSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
  3. Fuller & Co. v. StebbinsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
  4. Chariton & Lucas County National Bank v. TaylorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
  5. Shelley v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. General Mills, Inc. v. PrallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1953
  2. Concannon v. BlackmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
  3. Headley v. HeadleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1969
  4. Weissenburger v. Iowa District Court for Warren CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 2007
  5. State v. HarbourSupreme Court of Iowa · 1949

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API