Sutcliffe v. Pence
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Monroe District Court. — Hon. H. M. Anderson, Judge. Action at law to recover'' a sum of money alleged to have been received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff, Ruth Sutcliffe. There was a directed verdict for the defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. The material facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtWeaver, J.
The record without substantial ’ conflict tends to show that in the year 1900 the plaintiff, Ruth Sutcliffe, was the owner of a tract of land which she sold and conveyed to the defendant. Prior to said sale, a railroad company had located .and taken possession of a right of way across said land, and Mrs. Sutcliffe had an unsettled claim against said company for damages on account of such appropriation of her property, and such claim was then in litigation. In negotiating for the land, Pence did not wish to assume any responsibility for the lawsuit, and it was orally agreed between said…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Alston v. AlstonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1901
- Trayer v. ReederSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Gardner v. LightfootSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- Maxwell v. McCallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Puttman v. HalteySupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dawson v. McKinnonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1939
- Birckner v. TilchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
- Carey v. WalkerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
- Phelan v. PeetersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1967
- Helberg v. ZuckSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926