Hetherington v. Bissell
Supreme Court of Iowa
‘Appeal from the Dubuque City Court. These cases involve substantially the same questions as those decided in Davis &¡ Bro. v. Woolnough, 9 Iowa 104. Some further positions were presented by counsel for the defendants and appellants, which will be found sufficiently stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
‘Appeal from the Dubuque City Court. These cases involve substantially the same questions as those decided in Davis &¡ Bro. v. Woolnough, 9 Iowa 104. Some further positions were presented by counsel for the defendants and appellants, which will be found sufficiently stated in the opinion. I. The law establishing a city court in the City of Dubuque and conferring upon such court jurisdiction in civil and chancery cases (within certain limits) with the District Court, with appeals direct to the Supreme Court, with no supervisory power in the District Court, is in conflict with, and in violation…
1Opinion of the CourtWeight, C. J.
We do not propose to re-exSlw^^t^iy**®^" questions decided in the case of Davis & Bro. v. Woolnough, 9 Iowa 104. A brief reference will be made to some further considerations now presented by counsel.
It is claimed that the act of 1857, providing for the incorporation of the City of Dubuque, is divisible, and that the repealing act of 1858 may be and is constitutional as to so much of the charter as provides for a city court, though unconstitutional as to the other part. The act oi 1858, in a few words, but expressly, repeals the acts of 1857, or at the least this was the design and intention.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ex parte PritzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- Davis & Bro. v. WoolnoughSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
3Cited by2 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Welsh v. DarlingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933
- Baker & Griffin v. The Steamboat MilwaukeeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862