Legal Opinion

Cox v. Cox

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 14, 1984No. 83-1360PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REYNOLDSON, Chief Justice.

This is an interlocutory appeal from the trial court’s order granting plaintiff’s summary judgment motion. We affirm the tri al court’s holding that a contingent remain-derman of a trust may compel an accounting absent a showing of mismanagement or waste.

I. The controversy involves a trust established in 1944 by the will of Arthur Cox, an Iowa City resident. Cox was survived by his wife, Elizabeth, and three children: Louisa, Sarah and Thomas G. A fourth child, Frederick G., predeceased the testator. After bequests of personal property and the homestead in the Cox…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Katz Investment Co. v. LynchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1951
  2. Engelsmann v. HolekampSupreme Court of Missouri · 1966
  3. Skelton v. CrossSupreme Court of Iowa · 1936
  4. Hanson v. BirminghamDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1950
  5. Ponzelino v. PonzelinoSupreme Court of Iowa · 1947

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Coster v. CrookhamSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
  2. Carstens v. Central National Bank & Trust Co. of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1990
  3. Davis v. DavisIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. Williams v. Security Nat. Bank of Sioux City, IowaDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2005
  5. Smith v. Bank of ClearwaterDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985

1 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