Daniels v. Lindley
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Cuthrie Circuit Court. On the 7th day of December, 1871, the plaintiff recovered a judgment against defendant, Elwood Lindley, for about $138. In November, 1871, the defendant, E. R. Lindley, commenced an action against said Elwood Lindley, her husband, for a divorce, and alimony.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cuthrie Circuit Court. On the 7th day of December, 1871, the plaintiff recovered a judgment against defendant, Elwood Lindley, for about $138. In November, 1871, the defendant, E. R. Lindley, commenced an action against said Elwood Lindley, her husband, for a divorce, and alimony. On the 7th day of December, 1874, and about one hour before the rendition of plaintiff’s judgment against Elwood Lindley, the said E. R. Lindley filed in the clerk’s office her amendment to her original petition, asking for a writ of attachment. A writ of attachment was issued on all the property of…
1Opinion of the CourtRothrock, J.
i. practice: amendment. I. The first question presented in the argument is that, as no notice of the amendment by which the attachment was procured was given to the defendant, Elwood Lindley, the court had no jurisdiction to order that the decree giving all the property to the wife should date back to the date of the attachment. It is a sufficient answer to this to say that there is no allegation in the *569petition that notice of the amendment was not given. It is alleged that no notice of the attachment was given. Notice of the attachment is very different from notice of the filing of an…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Romaine v. . ChaunceyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Bagnall v. Iowa-Des Moines National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1947
- State ex rel. Huber v. KingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1897
- Duvall v. DuvallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
- Brenger v. BrengerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.