Legal Opinion

Martin v. Davis

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided January 25, 1896PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Chickasaw District Court. — Hon. W. A. Hoyt and L. E. Fellows, Judges. i Suit in equity to enjoin the defendant from trespassing on certain real estate. A .temporary injunction was allowed. A motion was made to dissolve •the injunction, which motion was overruled. Later on, another motion to dissolve was presented, and this last motion was stricken from the files on motion of the plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

Eothrock,0. J.

1 2 *7203 4 5 *719It appears from the petition for an injunction and the affidavits in support and resistance of said motions to dissolve that the plaintiff is the owner of a farm which he leases to tenants. On the ■eighth day of August, 1894, the plaintiff made and signed the following writing: “Elma, Iowa, 8-18, 1894. Agreement, this .is to sertify that I have rented my farm for the year 1895 for the sum of three hundred dollars payment to be stated in contract to the said James Davis. [Signed] Lawrence Martin.” No other written agreement was made, but, as the memorandum above…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of Council Bluffs v. StewartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
  2. Cowles v. ShawSupreme Court of Iowa · 1856
  3. Gibbs v. McFaddenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Kelty v. McPeakeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
  2. Coulthard v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  3. Schultz v. Hastings Lodge No. 50Nebraska Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Hall v. HenningerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API