Legal Opinion
Votruba v. Hanke
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided November 16, 1926PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEvans, J.
I One of the defenses pleaded was that the notice of forfeiture served upon the defendants was not sufficiently specific to comply with the requirements of the statute, Paragraph 2, Section 12390, Code of 1924. The specification contained in the notice of forfeiture was as follows:
“Eor the reason that you have failed to comply with the terms and conditions of said contract in that you have failed to pay the installments which are due upon said contract, have failed to pay the taxes for the. year 1924 due and payable in 1925, and that you have failed to pay the interest and installments due…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Palmer v. Tandem Management Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1993
- Warren v. YocumSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
- Khan v. Heritage Property ManagementCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1998
- Watson v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1952
- Hurst v. DavisWyoming Supreme Court · 1963
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.