Worster, Templin & Co. v. Oliver
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Washington District Court. Motion to quasb tbe original notice. Tbe court bad, by general rule, adopted and entered of record: “ ordered that parties defendants be required to plead, answer, or demur, on or before tbe morning, of tbe first day of tbe term.” Tbe notice in tbis instance served on tbe defendants, required them to appear and answer to tbe petition, on or before tbe morning of tbe second day of tbe term.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Washington District Court. Motion to quasb tbe original notice. Tbe court bad, by general rule, adopted and entered of record: “ ordered that parties defendants be required to plead, answer, or demur, on or before tbe morning, of tbe first day of tbe term.” Tbe notice in tbis instance served on tbe defendants, required them to appear and answer to tbe petition, on or before tbe morning of tbe second day of tbe term. At tbe return term, a motion was made to quasb tbe notice, for tbe reason “ that said notice does not inform tbe defendants of tbe time when, by tbe rule of tbe…
1Opinion of the CourtStockton, J.
Tbe notice does not inform tbe defendants of tbe time when, by rule of tbe court (different from tbe time fixed by statute), they were required to answer tbe petition. Was tbis sucb a defect or irregularity, as authorized *347the court to set aside the notice, and continue the cause for want of service ?
The effect of the rule is, to change the law which requires the defendant to plead, answer, or demur, on or before the morning of the second day of the term, and the defendant may be required to answer by the morning of the first day. The appellants claim that this rule haying the force of law,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Kitsmiller v. KitchenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Spokane Merchants Ass'n v. AcordWashington Supreme Court · 1918