Crum v. Emmett
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal .from Taylor District Court. — P. C. WinteR, Judge. . Appeal by. plaintiff from an order overruling his motion, in Three divisions: To strike'certain portions of defendant’s answer, as being conclusions of law, redundant, immaterial, and surplusage; to make the answer more specific in certain respects; and to require defendant to separate the answer into counts or divisions. The trial court overruled the motion, and plaintiff appeals. —
1Opinion of the Court
Preston, J.-
Appellee 'has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the order is not appealable because the ruling does not affect the merits. The motion was submitted *798with the case. The action is at law, on a note for $2,000, alleged to have been executed by defendant to the bank of which plaintiff is receiver. Defendant’s original answer does not appear in the abstract. The first is what he denominates an amended and substituted answer. To that pleading, plaintiff filed his motion, which was amended a time or two, as was the defendant’s answer. The amendments to the answer,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Allen v. ChurchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Northwestern Trading Co. v. Western Live Stock InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Specht v. SpangenbergSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
- Hogan v. McCombs Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1921
- McClurg v. McEvoySupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dorman v. Credit Reference & Reporting Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1932
- Ontjes v. McNiderSupreme Court of Iowa · 1937
- Morrison v. Carroll ClinicSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Commercial Credit Corp. v. Interstate Finance Corp.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1943
- Crowell v. Home Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1943
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.