City of Sioux City v. Young
Supreme Court of Iowa
1ConcurrenceLarson, J.
(concurring specially) — I am satisfied that the legislature by chapter 200, Acts of the Fifty-seventh General Assembly, amending section 410.10, Code of 1954, did not in fact create any new rights or modify the applicable law, that it did no more than invade the court’s judicial function of construing the enacted statutes, and since the action was between the same parties, involving the same facts and same law, the prior judgment was res judicata. I am unwilling to conclude that the legislature could not, by proper enactment, extend to Joseph E. Young and anyone in like situations the right…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- American Insurance v. 356 Bales of CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- National Bank v. County of YanktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Hurd v. AlbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Utter v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Matter of Mullane v. McKenzieNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.