Freitag v. Huiskamp
Supreme Court of Iowa
1DissentRawlings, Justice
I am in disagreement with the result reached by the majority and the reasoning by which it is achieved, therefore dissent.
I. In holding the letter from Lee County Treasurer to taxpayer constituted a statutorily sufficient “demand”, the majority cites and relies in large part, if not entirely, on Bell v. Stevens, 116 Iowa 451, 90 N.W. 87. That case involved the use of an original notice to fulfill the statutory prerequisite that demand for payment of moneys and credits taxes claimed owing be made thirty days before legal action is commenced to enforce payment. I find no reason to disagree with…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Anderson v. JesterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Consolidated Freightways Corp. of Del. v. NicholasSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965
- Parkhurst v. WhiteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1962
- Smith v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Halverson v. HagemanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1958
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.