Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Kramme

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided June 9, 1953No. 48254Published

1DissentHays, J.

(dissenting) — I am unable to agree with the majority opinion and respectfully dissent.

The single issue presented by this appeal is the construction to be placed upon the first of the two .clauses in the contract, quoted in the majority opinion, as all are agreed that no recovery may be had under the second clause thereof.

The primary rule of construction is to give effect to the intention of the parties and to avoid unfair and unreasonable results where possible. Darnall v. Day, 240 Iowa 665, 37 N.W.2d 277. In my judgment the majority opinion has failed to ascertain the intention of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hipwell v. the National Surety Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1905
  2. Brill v. BrillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  3. Darnall v. DaySupreme Court of Iowa · 1949
  4. In Re Estate of WalkerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944
  5. State v. CordaroSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API