Warner v. Cammack
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Fayette District Court. Monday, December 15. This is an action in equity to enjoin the sale of certain property under execution, on the ground that it is the homestead of the plaintiff. The answer denies that it is so the homestead as to be exempt from sale under the execution. The sheriff was also made a party defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Fayette District Court. Monday, December 15. This is an action in equity to enjoin the sale of certain property under execution, on the ground that it is the homestead of the plaintiff. The answer denies that it is so the homestead as to be exempt from sale under the execution. The sheriff was also made a party defendant. A temporary injunction was granted expa/rie, and afterward, on notice, a motion was made by the defendant, before the judge who granted it, to dissolve the injunction. The motion was overruled, and the defendant appeals.'
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
There is no controversy respecting the material facts of the case. They are, that on the 11th day of September, 1871, this plaintiff sold to this defendant a certain patent improvement in a mop wringer for the county of Blackhawk, in Iowa, for the sum of $100; that the defendant paid said sum to the plaintiff by his negotiable note for that amount, payable in six months, secured by a mortgage on his team; that this plaintiff, before said note matured, sold the same to one Hosford, and used the money obtained therefor in the purchase of lumber for the construction of the house on the premises…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Johnson v. ButlerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1856
3Cited by15 opinions
- Brun v. MannCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Schooley v. SchooleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Shelby v. ZieglerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Buena Vista County v. Marathon Savings BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- In Re the Marriage of McMorrowSupreme Court of Iowa · 1983
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.