McKinney v. Hartman
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Davis District Court. , This action was commenced before a justice of tbe peace, to recover tbe possession of certain real estate, wbicb tbe plaintiff alleges was forcibly detained by defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Davis District Court. , This action was commenced before a justice of tbe peace, to recover tbe possession of certain real estate, wbicb tbe plaintiff alleges was forcibly detained by defendant. Tbe petition avers, that be leased tbe disputed premises to defendant for a certain term, for so much rent per month; that by tbe lease, wbicb was in writing, said defendant was to deliver to plaintiff tbe possession of tbe premises at tbe expiration of tbe term; but that tbe said term bas expired, and defendant willfully bolds over and refuses to quit tbe possession and deliver tbe…
1Opinion of the CourtWeight, C. J.
As an abstract proposition properly construed, tbe instruction given, is most clearly correct. To it, as a rule, there can be no reasonable or just exception. The effect of it, however, is to submit to the jury a question that should be determined by the court. It is no part of the duty of the jury, nor have they, any right to determine from tbe pleadings, what allegations are admitted or denied. When a question of this character is raised, it' is tbe province of the court alone to examine tbe pleadings, and if any allegations are to be taken as true for want of tbe necessary denial, to so…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dunsmore v. ElliottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fitzgerald v. McCartySupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Keatley v. Illinois Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Fannon v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
- Pharo v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Potter v. WoosterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.