Legal Opinion

Caulfield v. Noonan

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 31, 1940No. 45343PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBliss, J.

Since the judgment was upon the motion to dismiss the petition, as amended, we must go to that pleading for the facts. It alleges in count No. 1: that the defendants Rose Noonan and Matilda Cain are daughters of James and Mary Caulfield, and that Edward Caulfield, a son of James and Mary Caulfield, and a brother of Rose and Matilda, is deceased, and the defendant Tritz, is acting as the executor of his estate; that Edward never married and died after the death of both his parents, leaving neither wife, child, nor grandchildren, so that the heirs of his parents are the legal heirs of Edward,…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Chehak v. BattlesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
  2. Stiles v. BreedSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  3. Anfenson v. BanksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
  4. Daily ex rel. Daily v. MinnickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
  5. Estate of Lamb v. MorrowSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Estate of RadovichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Couch v. CouchCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1951
  3. Wooster v. Iowa State Tax CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
  4. In Re Estate of OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  5. In Re Estate of TrippSupreme Court of Iowa · 1948

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API