Legal Opinion

Schroeder v. District Court

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 17, 1931No. 40923PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorling, J.

The administrator’s contention is- that the attorney for the claimant was incompetent to make the service because the statute. (Section 11959) prescribes that "ten days’ notice of .the hearing thereof (qf the claim), which shall be at some .regular term of the court, accompanied -by a copy of the claim, shall be served on one of the executors or administrators in the manner required for commencing, ordinary actions, unless the same has been approved by the executor or administrator, in which case it may be allowed by the , clerk, without notice, and so entered upon the probate calendar.”

Sectio…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Raher v. RaherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  2. City of Davenport v. BirdSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
  3. First National Bank v. EstensonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  4. In Re Estate of HarshSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
  5. Hueston v. Preferred Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Gibbons v. BeltSupreme Court of Iowa · 1948
  2. In re the Estate of SmithNew York Surrogate's Court · 1940
  3. Blue Grass Savings Bank v. FullerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940
  4. In Re Accusation Against RyanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API