Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gottstein v. Hedges

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 13, 1929No. 39616Published

1DissentDe Graff, J.

(dissenting). — I respectfully dissent to the pronouncement made by the majority as to the interpretation of the facts and the law as applied to the facts. This is an action in the nature of a creditor’s bill. The plaintiff was the judgment creditor of the defendant Eda Hedges, and when he commenced his equitable action, in conformity to Section 11815 et seq., Code of 1927, he thereby "effectually secured by the filing of a bill in chancery” an equitable lien; "for it has long been the settled doctrine in equity that the filing of such a bill in chancery has the effect of creating a specific…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Pearsall v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Koch v. StreuterIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Hall v. . QuinnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Dodd v. RottermanIllinois Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Bridgman & Co. v. McKissickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863

13 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