Bicklin, Winzer & Co. v. Kendall
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Louisa District Court — IIoN. David RyaN, Judge. AotioN by ATTACHMENT. Garrett intervened, claiming tlie property attached. After various proceedings, a judgment upon default was rendered against plaintiffs, in favor of tlie intervenor, from which plaintiffs appeal.
1Opinion of the Court
Beck, J.—
I. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as follows:
In 1881, plaintiffs brought an action by attachment against defendant Kendall, and certain goods were seized under a writ issued in the case. Garrett filed his petition of intervention in the action, claiming to be the owner of the goods, and praying that he might be so adjudged, and might recover costs. Plaintiffs answered this petition, denying Garrett’s ownership of the property. At the first term of the court, in 1882, plaintiffs recovered judgment against defendant Kendall, and an order was made for the sale of *491the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- First National Bank v. Gill & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- Bickler, Winzer & Co. v. KendallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Day Bros. & Co. v. KendallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
3Cited by16 opinions
- Simms v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1941
- Stimson v. StimsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Dorman v. Credit Reference & Reporting Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1932
- Seiffert & Wiese Lumber Co. v. HartwellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Weidert v. Monahan Post Legionnaire Club, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1952
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.