Henry F. Wagner

The case concerned a negligence claim by plaintiff Buchanan against defendant Hurd Creamery Co. after the defendant's truck, operated by an employee, approached Buchanan's horse-drawn buggy on a highway in 1931; the truck produced loud cracking noises and had a billowing canvas cover that frightened the horses, causing them to veer into a ditch. Buchanan sued for damages, and the trial court denied the defendant's motions for directed verdict and submitted the issues of negligence and proximate cause to the jury, which returned a verdict for the plaintiff. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that the evidence created a jury question on whether the truck's unusual noise and appearance were the proximate cause of the accident and that the jury instruction properly encompassed the pleaded grounds of negligence without prejudice to the defendant.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved the retrial of defendant Johnson for the second-degree murder of his wife, resulting in a manslaughter conviction after an earlier reversal of a prior judgment. The primary issue on appeal concerned the trial court's rulings limiting cross-examination of a key prosecution witness—the decedent's son—who had admitted a felony conviction and residence in jail; defense counsel sought to elicit details of the witness's alleged involvement in bootlegging, larceny, and burglary to challenge his credibility and stated occupation as a laborer. The court held that such inquiries into specific unconnected crimes were improper on cross-examination unless tied to convictions for felonies, and that the witness's prior admission of a felony conviction satisfied the relevant impeachment statute. The opinion also upheld jury instructions stating that evidence of the defendant's good character could be considered as tending to show he was unlikely to have committed the charged offense but was not a complete defense. Finding no error in these evidentiary and instructional matters, the court affirmed the manslaughter conviction.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned plaintiffs' action in municipal court to regain possession of real estate sold to defendant under a 1930 installment contract after defendant defaulted on payments. Plaintiffs served statutory notices of forfeiture and to quit, then entered a written stipulation with defendant acknowledging overdue amounts and agreeing that timely payment was essential; failure to pay would entitle plaintiffs to immediate judgment for possession in that court. When defendant missed the stipulated payments, the municipal court granted plaintiffs' motion for judgment based on the stipulation, ordering defendant's removal. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the filed stipulation bound the parties, that defendant had consented to the judgment upon default, and that his failure to pay triggered the agreed remedy without need for further defenses or transfer to district court.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a negligence claim by plaintiff Danner, an employee riding on a hayrack, against truck owner Cooper and driver Bennett after a 1930 multi-vehicle collision at an intersection near Shenandoah, Iowa. Bennett's truck struck a stationary car at the intersection before veering into the hayrack, injuring Danner. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff on a jury verdict of $1,825 in damages. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence supported findings of negligence in the truck's speed and control, that jury instructions on proximate cause and third-party fault properly protected the defendants, and that the damages award was not excessive or the product of passion or prejudice.

torts & liability

The case involved a rug cleaning company seeking reimbursement from its auto insurance provider for judgments paid after a truck collision caused injuries to others. The insurance company denied coverage, claiming the policy excluded losses when the truck was operated by someone without a required chauffeur's license. The court determined that the employee driving the truck was not a "chauffeur" under Iowa law because his primary employment was in rug cleaning and delivery driving was only incidental, so no license was needed and the policy applied. Therefore, the court affirmed the judgment requiring the insurer to indemnify the company for the accident losses.

torts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

The case involved a dry cleaning company suing a competitor and a newspaper for publishing an advertisement that criticized half-price cleaning services as inferior, which the plaintiff claimed was a libelous attack on its own ongoing half-price promotions, causing loss of business. The trial court sustained the defendants' demurrer to the petition. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the advertisement was not libelous per se and that the plaintiff's claims for special damages were insufficient because they failed to identify specific lost customers or provide particularized allegations of harm, as required when defamation is not actionable on its face. The court reasoned that general assertions of declining patronage without naming affected parties do not state a viable cause of action.

torts & liabilityprocedurebusiness & regulatory

The case involved a claimant who deposited a check from his Omaha bank into the Moravia Bank to obtain certified checks for highway project bids; after his bids failed, he returned the checks and received an unpaid draft from the failing Moravia Bank, seeking to classify his claim as preferred on the theory that the deposit created a trust fund for a specific purpose. The court affirmed the trial court's ruling that the claim was only that of a general depositor, not entitled to preferred status under the relevant statute. The core reasoning was that a specific deposit creates a trust only if the bank held sufficient cash on hand to cover the obligation at the time the draft was issued, which was not the case here as the bank lacked adequate funds throughout the relevant period and applied the proceeds to its own debts upon closing. The court distinguished prior cases where cash reserves were adequate and held that the absence of such reserves meant no trust relationship was established.

business & regulatory

In this case, the plaintiffs sued Des Moines Railway Co. for damages after a streetcar struck and killed John C. Lynch, who was driving a milk wagon, alleging the motorman's negligence in failing to warn, slow down, or stop. Although the decedent was contributorily negligent, the trial court submitted the case to the jury solely on the last clear chance doctrine, which the jury applied to award $5,000 (later adjusted to $4,900). The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, permitted the jury to infer the motorman had actual or constructive knowledge of Lynch's peril in time to avoid the collision through ordinary care, making that failure the proximate cause of death. The court also found no prejudicial error in evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or the entry of duplicate judgments after remittitur.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved the estate of Bertie H. Durey, where the widow serving as executrix paid herself a widow's allowance and proceeds from exempt personal property, and the surety on her bond was sued by a creditor after the estate's insolvency prevented full payment of debts. The trial court entered judgment against the executrix and her surety for improper disbursements totaling over $9,000 (including excess allowance and exempt property proceeds), granting credit for the widow's separate claim against the estate. The appellate court affirmed, reasoning that the executrix was obligated to return funds not properly due to her as widow, the exempt property proceeds remained estate assets for creditors, and the surety's liability on the bond attached regardless of the executrix's personal insolvency. The court noted that certain payments like taxes on devised real estate were conceded as proper for inclusion in the judgment.

propertyfamily lawprocedure

The case concerned whether a foreign corporation based in Maryland could sue in Iowa courts to collect on an advertising contract with an Iowa company without first obtaining a state permit. The contract was formed by an offer mailed from out of state and accepted by mail in Iowa. Iowa law barred foreign corporations doing business in the state from maintaining actions on in-state contracts absent a permit. The court held that the contract was made in Iowa but that the corporation was not doing business in Iowa, as it merely solicited the ad and performed all work outside the state. The judgment for the plaintiff was therefore affirmed.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involves a challenge to a jury instruction in a criminal trial that directed jurors to determine the defendant's guilt or innocence solely based on admitted evidence and no other matter. The dissenting opinion argues that the instruction is overly restrictive because it excludes consideration of the lack or want of evidence, which is essential to a proper reasonable doubt analysis. Citing the prior decision in State v. Patrick, the dissent finds the instruction equivalent to one previously disapproved for improperly limiting the jury's role. As a result, the dissent concludes that the conflicting instructions create reversible error and would reverse the verdict.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a dispute over a promissory note executed in favor of a bank, which required semi-annual installment payments of $1,000 plus interest but contained no acceleration clause. After the makers defaulted on the first installment, the bank's receiver sued and obtained a judgment for only the amounts then due; a second suit was later filed for the next installment. The defendants argued that the first judgment barred the second action under principles of former adjudication, but the court rejected this claim. It held that the prior action addressed only the installments due at that time, as nothing more had matured under the note's terms, and the plaintiff could not have recovered the full amount in the initial suit without facing a prematurity objection. The judgment for the plaintiff on the second installment was therefore affirmed.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

The case involved former spouses who had adopted a child; after their 1928 divorce decree granted the wife custody but explicitly provided no alimony due to a property settlement, the wife petitioned in 1932 to modify the decree to add alimony (citing an alleged prior stipulation and the husband's inheritance), monthly child support, and attorney fees. The court ruled that the original decree's no-alimony provision was a final adjudication that could not be modified, even based on changed circumstances or a prior agreement, and denied attorney fees. However, it allowed modification for child support because the father's duty to support the minor child is continuous and distinct from alimony. The trial court's dismissal was affirmed in part and reversed in part on the child-support claim.

family lawprocedure

In Harnagel v. Fett, the plaintiff sought to impose a resulting trust on farmland titled in the defendant's name, claiming he had contributed to the purchase price through loans arranged for his son and daughter-in-law after the defendant contracted to buy the property from a third party. The court held that no resulting trust arose in the plaintiff's favor for either the $1,000 loan from the grandfather or the portion of the $6,400 Faeth note he later paid as surety. The core reasoning was that a resulting trust requires the claimant to have furnished consideration at the time legal title was acquired, with the children as principals and the plaintiff merely a surety on the notes; thus the funds belonged to the principals, and the plaintiff's later payments did not retroactively create an interest in the property.

property

In Harvey v. Knowles Storage & Moving Co., the plaintiff sued a moving company for personal injury and property damage after his car went into a ditch while attempting to pass the defendant's truck, which had stopped on the highway at night due to a flat tire. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendant at the close of evidence. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence showed the truck was visible with lights on and its employees were promptly repairing the tire, so no negligence by the defendant was established. The court further held that the plaintiff's own conduct constituted contributory negligence as a matter of law because he was driving at 40 miles per hour, too close behind another vehicle to stop within the assured clear distance ahead as required by statute.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a negligence claim by Bookhart against an auto dealer after he was injured during a test drive of a vehicle arranged by the dealer's salesman as part of negotiations to trade cars. The trial court denied the defendant's motion for directed verdict under Iowa's guest statute (Section 5026-b1, Code 1931), which limits liability to guests or invitees unless the driver was intoxicated or reckless, and submitted the case to the jury on ordinary negligence grounds; the jury found for the plaintiff. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the uncontradicted evidence showed the plaintiff was not riding as a guest but as a passenger for hire because the trip was a sales demonstration providing commercial benefit to the defendant. The court reasoned that such transportation in a business context constitutes reward or hire, distinguishing it from gratuitous hospitality, and thus the guest statute did not bar recovery for negligence. The opinion notes the absence of evidence of recklessness and treats the issue as one of first impression in the state.

torts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

In Courtney v. Courtney, the wife sought a divorce on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment, citing incidents of physical striking, false accusations of infidelity, threats with a gun, and other conduct that impaired her health; the husband filed a cross-petition seeking divorce on the same ground and requesting custody of their two minor children. The trial court granted the wife a divorce, awarded her custody of the children, and ordered the husband to pay $25 monthly in alimony. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence established the husband's inhuman treatment endangered the wife's life within the meaning of the applicable statutes (Sections 10475 and 10476, Codes 1927 and 1931), that the wife's testimony was sufficiently corroborated as required by statute, that the husband failed to prove his cross-claims, and that placing custody with the mother served the children's best interests given their young ages.

family law

The case concerned Christina Strand's claim against the estate of Ben W. Long for unpaid compensation for decades of household and nursing services she provided from 1904 until his death in 1930. The administrator admitted receiving $2,000 in prior payments but raised a special defense alleging an oral settlement agreement under which Strand would accept $4,000 from the estate in full satisfaction of her claim. The trial court permitted Strand to testify about the alleged agreement in response to an improper interrogatory over objection, and the appellate court held this evidentiary ruling constituted prejudicial error because it likely influenced the jury's finding that no settlement had occurred. The judgment for Strand was therefore reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved a slander lawsuit in which the plaintiff alleged that the defendant made false statements accusing her of harboring 55 stolen chickens and stealing corn, seeking only actual damages. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff after a jury verdict, but the Iowa Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial. The court held that the trial judge erred by instructing the jury on malice and allowing evidence of repeated slanderous statements, since only actual damages (not punitive damages) were at issue and malice was not relevant absent a privilege defense. The court also found error in excluding evidence of witness bias and in unduly restricting the defendant's cross-examination of the plaintiff's witnesses about the full conversation in which the statements were allegedly made.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a car colliding with a moving train at a railroad crossing in the small town of Zwingle, Iowa, where plaintiffs claimed the railroad company was negligent for failing to sound a whistle, ring a bell, or provide other warnings as the train departed the depot at night. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendant railroad, and the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed that ruling. The court held there was no actionable negligence because the railroad complied with all statutory signal requirements, the train's presence on the crossing served as adequate warning, and the company had no duty to guard against an occurrence that could not reasonably be anticipated under the circumstances. The reasoning emphasized that due care requires protecting against probabilities rather than mere possibilities, and the evidence did not support a finding that the railroad should have foreseen the risk of a lighted vehicle striking the train.

torts & liability