Shoemaker v. City of Muscatine
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
ALLBEE, Justice.
This appeal was taken by plaintiffs, Robert and Dorothy Shoemaker, from a ruling which sustained a motion by defendant, City of Muscatine, to dismiss division IV of plaintiffs’ petition. Because that ruling was interlocutory and plaintiffs failed to seek and obtain permission to appeal in advance of final judgment, this appeal must be dismissed.
Plaintiffs’ property was condemned as part of Muscatine Urban Renewal Project 2. The compensation commission awarded damages of $82,500. Plaintiffs appealed to the district court. Their petition was in three divisions. Division I…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kuiken v. GarrettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1952
- Swets Motor Sales, Inc. v. PruisnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
- McGuire v. City of Cedar RapidsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
- Johnson v. Iowa State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965
- Bennett v. Ida CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Wilson v. NepstadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- Poulsen v. RussellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
- Suss v. SchammelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1985
- Lyon v. WillieSupreme Court of Iowa · 1980
- Rowen v. LeMars Mutual Insurance Co. of IowaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.