Kenwood Lumber Co. v. Armstrong
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Limit District Court.-F. 0. ELLISON, Judge. SUIT Ofl two promissory notes; Defense pleaded was fraud and conspiracy in obtaining same, and. that the maker was incompetent. Verdict for the defendants. Plaintiff's motion for a new trial was sustained, and defendants apjDeal.
1Opinion of the CourtFAVILLis, J.
1. NEw TRIAL: numerous-pointea motion siistame~1 gen-orally. L The sole question for our determination is whether or not the court erred in sustaining appellee's motion for a new trial. It is unnecessary that we go into the questions involved in the main case in detail. The suit is brought on two promissory notes. Appellants alleged that the notes were obtained from the maker by fraud; that they were procured by means of a conspiracy to which appellee was a party; and that the maker was incompetent at the time the notes were procured. The motion for a new trial was based upon twenty-two…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Royer v. King's Crown Plaster Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Holland v. KellySupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Cook v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Stewart v. Iowa Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Scott v. HawkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Shaw v. AddisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1945
- Dunham v. Des Moines Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1949
- Gutierrez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- H & S LTD. v. AndreolaCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1984