Legal Opinion

In Re Estate of Sarah Runnells

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided February 18, 1927PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEvans, C. J.

I. The more important difficulties of this case involve its collisions with Section 11257, Code of 1924 (Section 4604, Code of 1897), and with the statute of frauds, Section 11286, Code of 1924.

The claimant predicated her case in the first instance upon two grounds: (1) Quantum meruit-, (2) oral express contract. She later withdrew the quantum meruit count, and rested her case upon the alleged express contract and her performance thereof. All the testimony of the claimant was received over appropriate objections, which need not be incorporated herein. The multiplicity of these objections has…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. McElhenney v. HendricksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1891
  2. Walkley v. ClarkeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
  3. Campbell v. CollinsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
  4. Runnels v. AndersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
  5. In re Estate of La GrangeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1921

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Maasdam v. Estate of MaasdamSupreme Court of Iowa · 1946
  2. In Re Estate of NewsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
  3. O'Dell v. O'DellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1947
  4. Brandt v. SchuchaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1959
  5. Fairall v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1939

7 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