Cibula v. Pitt's Sons' Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Tama Circmt Cowrt. The original notice in this action, which was duly served,., recites that the petition would be on file November the 20th % it was filed November the 22d. The defendants moved to-.' dismiss the petition, for the reason that it was filed after thei time specified in the notice. The motion was overruled, and' judgment was rendered against defendants. Erom this ruling and judgment defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtBeck, J.
1. practice : tioiirot petition. I. Code, § 2600, provides that if the petition be not filed by the date fixed in the notice, and ten days before the term, “the action will be deemed discontinued.” This language is imperative, and unless the defendant waive the non-compliance with the terms of the notice the action must be discontinued. See Hudson v. Blanfus et al., 22 Iowa, 323.
2_._. appearance. II. Did the appearance of the defendant, for the purpose of presenting the motion to discontinue the cause, waiTe the defect resulting from the late filing of the petition?
The language of section…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hudson v. BlanfusSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
3Cited by13 opinions
- Read v. RouschSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
- Louden Machinery Co. v. American Malleable Iron Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Iowa · 1904
- Moffitt v. Chicago Chronicle Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- Paddleford v. CookSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Credit Industrial Corporation v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.