Hunn v. Ashton
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Polk District Court. — Hon. W. F. CoNRADy J udge. Action at law to recover a sum alleged to be due plaintiff, a real estate agent, as commissions earned iri making a sale of real estate for defendants. There was a trial to the court, a jury being waived. Judgment was rendered in favor of defendants for costs, and the plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Bishop, O. J.
i effect of pleading over. Upon entering their appearance in the-’action the defendants filed a motion addressed to the petition asking that some, of the allegations thereof be made more specific. This motion was sustained, an(j pfain-fci|f now assigns error based upon the ruling. Whatever may have been the theory upon which, the ruling was predicated, and whether such ruling-was correct or otherwise, we -cannot consider the assignment, for tb,e reason that the record shows that the ruling was complied with by an amendment filed in which the additional facts called for were set…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hurd v. LadnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- Denby v. FieSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
3Cited by12 opinions
- Smith v. Waterloo, Cedar Falls & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1921
- Crow v. CasadySupreme Court of Iowa · 1921
- Broderick v. BarrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
- Butterfield v. Consolidated Fuel Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1913
- Depping v. HansmeierSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.