Deere & Co. v. Needles
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Gass Ovreuit Court. The plaintiffs commenced an action by attachment against the defendant, G. M. Needles, and attached a horse, buggy, and harness. E. G. Eisher intervened in the action, claiming that he was the absolute owner of the property, by purchase from the defendant, Needles.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Gass Ovreuit Court. The plaintiffs commenced an action by attachment against the defendant, G. M. Needles, and attached a horse, buggy, and harness. E. G. Eisher intervened in the action, claiming that he was the absolute owner of the property, by purchase from the defendant, Needles. The plaintiffs, in their answer to the petition of intervention, claimed that the pretended purchase of the property by Fisher was without consideration, and made with the intent to hinder, delay, and defraud the creditors of Needles. They also claimed that said Needles retained possession of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Rothrock, Ch. J.
3. appeal to court^W-abstract. I. Some question is made by counsel for appellees as to the sufficiency of appellant’s abstract. It is claimed that it does not show that the bill of exceptions was certified by the judge, and made part of the record, and that the abstract does not purport to set out the bill of exceptions. The abstract recites that it is an abstract of all the evidence, and that, within the time fixed by the court, the intervenor filed his bill of excej)tions, “ embracing all the foregoing testimony and record.” This is sufficient. It will be presumed that the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Notley v. First State BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Goad v. WellendorfSupreme Court of Colorado · 1919
- Peycke Bros. v. HazenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Harris v. PenceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Preston v. PetersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899