Legal Opinion · Dissent

George v. Gander

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 14, 1967No. 52543Published

1DissentLarson, J.

I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that a failure to have a petition on file at the time stated in the original notice is sufficient cause to require a dismissal, on the merits, of his action under rule 55 of the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure. I do not agree.

This troublesome question is not one of recent origin. The problem arose in the Cade of 1851, section 1716, the predecessor of rule 55, which provided: “If the petition is not filed by the time thus fixed, or if not filed ten days before the first day of the next term, the action will be deemed discontinued, unless good cause be…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Read v. RouschSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
  2. Paddleford v. CookSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
  3. Cibula v. Pitt's Sons' Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1878
  4. Credit Industrial Corporation v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
  5. Sioux County v. KostersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1922

7 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