Legal Opinion

Clark v. Figge

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 10, 1970No. 54093PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

UHLENHOPP, Justice.

The essential question before us is whether the two or the five-year statute of limitations applies to this action for interference with business relationships.

Plaintiff states his case substantially as follows. He says he owns the stock of a corporation which was a solvent concern in the retail appliance business in Davenport, Iowa. Defendant is president of a Davenport bank where plaintiff and the corporation did business. Plaintiff controlled the ownership of a parcel of real estate on which defendant held an option to purchase. The option expired, and plaintiff refused…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Louis K. Liggett Co. v. BaldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. United States v. Ralph 'Whitey' Tropiano, Lawrence R. Pellegrino and William Grasso,defendants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
  3. Kalmanash v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
  4. Bland v. SmithTennessee Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Sparks v. McCrearySupreme Court of Alabama · 1908

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Harsha v. State Savings BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
  2. Springer v. Weeks and Leo Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1988
  3. Schnebly Ex Rel. Schnebly v. BakerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
  4. Iowa Coal Mining Co. v. Monroe CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1996
  5. Sandbulte v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1984

44 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