Gamet v. Haas
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Harison District Court. — Hon. O. D. Wheeler, Judge. Action for alleged deceit resulted in a directed verdict for defendant and judgment thereon. The plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtLadd, C. J.
l. limitation op uient^'conceai1-3’ ment The transaction alleged to have been fraudulent occurred in 1903, and as this is an action at law for damages beSul1 APril 1912> it was barred by the statute of limitations, unless fraudulently concealed. McKay v. McCarthy, 146 Iowa, 546; Daugherty v. Daugherty, 116 Iowa, 246; McGinnis v. Hunt, 47 Iowa, 668.
If, however, the defendant by fraud concealed from plaintiff the existence of such cause of action, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until it was discovered, or might have been by the exercise of reasonable diligence. District *567Township…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- District Township of Boomer v. FrenchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Hubbard v. WeareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Rothmiller v. . SteinNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- McKay v. McCarthySupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Humphreys v. MattoonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Cole v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1951
- Woods v. SchmittSupreme Court of Iowa · 1989
- Conklin v. TowneSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Howe v. Sioux CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Van Wechel v. Van WechelSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.