Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sandbulte v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided January 18, 1984No. 83-314Published

1ConcurrenceUhlenhopp, Presiding Justice

(con-

curring specially).

I concur in the result and in all of the majority opinion except the majority’s reason for the result in division II-C.

I. I think the words “transaction or occurrence that is the basis for such opposing party’s claim” in rule 29 of the rules of civil procedure should be' given a liberal rather than a strict construction so that all contentions in a controversy are disposed of in a single action to avoid multiplicity of suits. See Walters v. Iowa-Des Moines National Bank, 295 N.W.2d 430, 432 (Iowa 1980) (“Rule 29 has as its objective the avoidance of a multiplicity of…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Pipeliners Local Union No. 798, Tulsa, Oklahoma, and A. Leroy Jones v. Fred H. EllerdCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1974
  2. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
  3. Clark v. FiggeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1970
  4. Albright v. GatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
  5. Adams v. BearArizona Supreme Court · 1960

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API