Legal Opinion

Geiger v. Payne

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 11, 1896PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Appeal from Ringgold District Court. — Hon. H. M. Towner, Judge. Action for breach of promise to marry. V erdiot and judgment for plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.—

1Opinion of the CourtGranger, J.

1 I. To the petition there was a substituted answer in five divisions. A demurrer was filed to all except the first division, and sustained as to the third, fourth, and fifth divisions, and the parties are in dispute as to whether it was sustained as to the second division; and, as we view the record, it is not important that we settle the dispute. That there is danger of misapprehension from the record is true, for there are no less than seven abstracts filed, and in some respects they obscure, rather than make clear,disputed questions. Error is assigned on the ruling of the court in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bennett v. BeamMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Daggett v. WallaceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1889
  3. Osmun v. WintersOregon Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Sprague v. AtleeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
  5. Tyler v. SalleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1889

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Rank v. KuhnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1945
  2. State v. CrouchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  3. Morgan v. MuenchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  4. Beyer v. City of DubuqueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1966
  5. Rime v. RaterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899

20 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