Legal Opinion
Barton v. City of Waterloo
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided June 23, 1934No. 42323PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKintzinger, J.
One of the questions raised in this case pertains to the sufficiency of the original notice, in that it was not addressed to the defendant, city of Waterloo.
On the 23d day of June, 1932, Myles J. Kildee, one of the attorneys for the plaintiff, attempted to serve the following original notice upon “Charles MacKay, City Clerk.”
“In the District Court of Iowa in and for Black Hawk County, la. September Term, 1932.
“R. E. Barton, Admr., Plaintiff v. City of Waterloo, Iowa, Defendant. 1 Original Notice.
“To Charles MacKay, City Clerk.
“You are hereby notified that there is now on file in the office of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Steele v. MurrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Sleeper v. KillionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Des Moines National Bank v. BatesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929
- In re AndersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Pilkington v. PotwinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Kriv v. Northwestern Securities Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1946
- Resthaven Cemetery Ass'n v. Board of Review of Polk CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1977
- United States v. Luquire Funeral ChapelCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
- Stampfer Bldg. Co. v. Board of Review of DubuqueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
- White v. O'NEILLSupreme Court of Iowa · 1969
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.