Nitta v. Kuda
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The blind goddess must, for the purposes of the instant case, be held to be also mute. She should ordinarily be attentive to the pleas of litigants, and prompt to pronounce her edicts; but here she can neither listen nor speak. The action before ns is a veritable Rip Van Winkle of a lawsuit. It has slumbered so long in some neglected file or forgotten pigeonhole that any rights the appellant may have had have been lost by the passage of the years. There is nothing we can do for him now.
The foregoing statements require some elucidation. Plaintiff’s case is based upon two contracts. The first…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Skemp v. OlanskySupreme Court of Iowa · 1957
- Slaughter v. McManigalSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Manning v. HeathSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Johnston v. Kirkville Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of Iowa · 1949
- Humble v. CarterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Danner v. HassSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965
- Tasco, Inc. v. WinkelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- Bechtel v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
- Farmers Butter & Dairy Cooperative v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1972
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.