Legal Opinion

Whitfield v. Grimes

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided October 22, 1940No. 45121PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStiger, J.

In August 1936, plaintiff, acting as attorney and trustee for bondholders, brought this suit for a writ of mandamus.

The following allegations appear in his amended and substituted petition: Prior to March 1,1924, Chariton River Drainage District No. 1 was -established. On or about March 1, 1924, the board of supervisors of Wayne county caused to be issued and sold drainage bonds wbicb were numbered serially. In 1929 and 1930, the bondholders, represented by plaintiff, purchased bonds No. 64 to No. 74, inclusive, in the principal sum of $7,400 due November 1, 1934, without notice of any defect…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Watkins v. Iowa Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1904
  2. Hansen v. Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of Iowa · 1922
  3. Stockholders Investment Co. v. Town of BrooklynSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933
  4. Back v. BackSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
  5. Downing v. City of OskaloosaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Brown v. SchmitzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1946
  2. Carroll v. BuntNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1946
  3. Avoca State Bank v. Merchants Mutual Bonding Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1977
  4. Weimer v. LueckSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944
  5. Whitfield v. SearsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1943

4 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