Keeney v. Lyon
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Polk District Court. ActxoN on a promissory note. After the second day of the first term, the defendant filed an answer, denying “each and every allegation in said petition contained, fully and specifically.” This answer was stricken from the files, and a default taken against defendant. Judgment for the plaintiff, aijd defendant appeals. cited Kellogg v. Church, 8 Code Rep. 39; 4 Pr.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Polk District Court. ActxoN on a promissory note. After the second day of the first term, the defendant filed an answer, denying “each and every allegation in said petition contained, fully and specifically.” This answer was stricken from the files, and a default taken against defendant. Judgment for the plaintiff, aijd defendant appeals. cited Kellogg v. Church, 8 Code Rep. 39; 4 Pr. R. 339; The Burlington § Missouri River Railroad Co. v. Marehand, 5 Iowa 468; Marlcey $• Fitting v. Mettler, 1 Iowa 528; Setvard v. Miller, 6 Pr. R. 312. contended that as the answer was but a…
1Opinion of the CourtWeight, J.
The court below erred in striking defendant’s answer from the files, and rendering judgment by default in favor of plaintiff.
There was no motion to strike, nor is there anything to show that it was asked. The record simply shows that “the answer of defendant herein is stricken from the files, and the defendant being three times called, comes not, but wholly makes default.” It was not a sufficient cause for striking, that it was filed after the second day of the term. Nor was it a sufficient cause, that it was but a general denial of plaintiff’s petition. The Burlington & Missouri River…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Burlington & Missouri River Railroad v. MarchandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hayden ex rel. Adams v. AndersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Edwards Loan Co. v. SkinnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905