Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Dunn v. Rose Way, Inc.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided May 18, 1983No. 68019Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMcGIVERIN, Justice

I respectfully concur in the result of division I of the majority opinion and dissent as to division II. I would affirm the rulings of the trial court.

I. The Iowa Code section 611.20 question. In McKillip v. Zimmerman, 191 N.W.2d 706, 709 (Iowa 1971), this court in a unanimous opinion held that the word “person” as used in Iowa Code section 611.20 “means only those born alive.” In Weitl v. Moes, 311 N.W.2d 259, 270-73 (Iowa 1981), we again adhered to that statutory construction. Since 1971, there has been no legislative change in the wording of section 611.20. Therefore, this court’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Weitl v. MoesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
  2. Stern v. MillerSupreme Court of Florida · 1977
  3. Norman v. MurphyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. McKillip v. ZimmermanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
  5. Cover v. CraemerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965

2 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