Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Haworth

Court of Appeals of Iowa

Decided August 26, 1987No. 86-281Published

1ConcurrenceSackett, Judge

(specially concurring).

I concur with the result reached by the majority but cannot concur with their reasoning because:

1. The majority has construed Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Heeren, 398 N.W. 2d 839 (Iowa 1987) as holding that Iowa Code § 628.3 (1987) prohibits a receiver from taking possession of land. I fail to find Heeren so holds. In Heeren the court clearly states the mortgagors failed to object to the appointment of a receiver on the ground of possession under § 628.3 or the fact the mortgage did not pledge rents and profits consequently. Id. at 841-42. Therefore, the issue of a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. HeerenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1987
  2. Farmers Trust & Savings Bank v. ManningSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
  3. Town of Neola v. ReichartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  4. American Investment Co. v. FarrarSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
  5. Hartman Manufacturing Co. v. LuseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903

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

Powered by the Exa API