Berry v. Kritenbrink
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Adair District Gourt. — Lorin N. Hays, Judge. We think the ultimate question is one of fact, and is whether the plaintiff appellee has waived his rights to the real estate iu controversy — whether or not the contract sued on by appellee has been forfeited or waived. The trial court held there was no forfeiture or waiver, and defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.
*11221. Appeal and error : grounds for review: points first raised on appeal. *1121I. In various ways, it is urged upon us that the petition states no cause of action, and for that reason the court erred in entering judgment and decree for *1122plaintiff. No such question was raised in the trial court at any time, and we will not indulge in citations for the holding that appellants are not now in position to raise that point in this court.
2. appeal and for 0reViCT?“nas first complaint as to unobjected evidence on appeal. II. There is some complaint that parol testimony was allowed, to enlarge the writings…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wilkie v. SassenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Iler v. GriswoldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1891
- Hoskins v. RoweSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
- Moller v. GottschSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- Pryne v. PryneSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Top of Iowa Cooperative v. Sime Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2000
- Matter of Estate of KalouseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- McKey-fansher Co. v. RowenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
- Berry v. KrittenbrinkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1922
- Kalouse v. BurdaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979