Hoyer v. McBride
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the CourtMorliNg, J.
The record shows that four razors, two or three pair of scissors, combs, strops, and a mug were released as exempt. We do not understand plaintiff to resist the defendant’s right to the exemption of his proper tools as a mechanic, under Section 11760, Code of 1924, and we think that such resistance could not be successfully made. Baker v. Maxwell, 183 Iowa 1192; Fore v. Cooper (Tex. Civ. App.), 34 S. W. 341; Terry v. McDaniel, 103 Tenn. 415 (53 S. W. 732); 25 Corpus Juris 51. As we understand plaintiff’s claim, it is that the defendant must point out the particular tools used solely by him,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smith v. McBrydeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Bliss v. VedderSupreme Court of Kansas · 1885
- Terry v. McDanielTennessee Supreme Court · 1899
- Baker v. MaxwellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Holden v. StranahanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re IndvikUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Iowa · 1990
- First Nat. Bank Mason City v. LarsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
- Matter of MyersUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Iowa · 1985
- In Re Estate of CarpenterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
- In re EbyDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1987