Legal Opinion

Pascoe v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 22, 1919PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Woodbury District Court. — W. G. Sears, Judge. The reason' for omitting any preliminary statement will presently be made to appear.

1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.

I. The “errors relied upon for reversal” *988and the “points and propositions of law” urged in support of these error assignments are found on the thirtieth page .of the printed argument for appellant, and are preceded by 26 pages setting out testimony. It is made clear what the issues are said to be, and how they were decided. As to the first, it is said that the issues are “narrowed down to the rulings of the court on the admission and the exclusion of evidence, the ruling of the court in directing a verdict for the defendant and entering judgment for him.” When we reach the errors relied on…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Siltz v. Hawkeye Ins.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  2. Neimeyer v. Weyerhaueser & DenkmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
  3. Wheeler v. SchilderSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
  4. J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. DravisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
  5. Riggs v. HatfieldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of MottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
  2. Reynolds v. HenrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1921
  3. Fisher v. McCartySupreme Court of Iowa · 1923
  4. Siesseger v. PuthSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API