Speers v. Fortner
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Mahaska District Court. Action for Damages. Plaintiff moved to expunge from the answer of the defendant, certain paragraphs upon the ground that they were redundant and scandalous. This motion was sustained, and defendant excepted. An attachment was asked and issued at the commencement of the suit.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Mahaska District Court. Action for Damages. Plaintiff moved to expunge from the answer of the defendant, certain paragraphs upon the ground that they were redundant and scandalous. This motion was sustained, and defendant excepted. An attachment was asked and issued at the commencement of the suit. One Eogers, who was a security upon the attachment bond, was offered as a witness on the part of the plaintiff, and objected to by the defendant, on the ground of interest. The objection was overruled, and he was admitted to testify; but what he stated, or whether his testimony was…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, C. J.
— There was no error in sustaining the motion to expunge. A portion of the matter so expunged is liable to the charge of being scandalous, and all of it is redundant and irrelevant. Not only so, but so much of the answer as remained, presented fully and completely every issue of fact, contained, or attempted to be set up, in the matter expunged. Defendant was, therefore, in no manner prejudiced by this ruling.
Did the court err in overruling the objection to the witness, Nogers ? Appellees insist that the witness was competent ; but that, if he was not, it does not appear what his testimony…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mays v. DeaverSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
- William J. Austin & Co. v. FeamsterMississippi Supreme Court · 1843
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. CliffordWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
- Jacobs v. City of Cedar RapidsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917