Rodenkirch v. Layton
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Winneshiek District Court. — C. H. Houck Judge. Suit to cancel deed purporting to convey certain lots of plaintiffs’ to J. D. Layton, and to quiet title therein. Layton alleged title in the property, and prayed that it be quieted. On hearing, the petition was dismissed, and the relief prayed by Layton granted. The plaintiffs appeal.—
1Opinion of the CourtLadd, J.
l. appeal and certified restenographfc' of evidence. I. ' No certified transcript of the evidence was filed within the time allowed for appeal. But a duly certified shorthand report of the evidence was. Under the original Section 3652 of the Code of 1897, appellant was, therefore, not entitled to review de novo. But he contends that, under an amendment to that statute, said filing of shorthand report gives the right to such review. Appellees insist that the amendment has not changed the law, and that the timely filing of certified transcript is still essential. The amendment to the statute is:
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Richardson v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Casady v. CarraherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Stapp v. GodfreySupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Mayer v. HamreSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Montgomery County v. American Emigrant Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1877
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Foley v. MathiasSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
- Bowers v. RothSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920