Bennett v. Parker

25 N.W. 700, 67 Iowa 451
Supreme Court of Iowa·Decided December 10, 1885·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Rotiirock, J.

The amount in controversy, as shown by the pleadings in the action, is less than $100, and' the cause comes to us on the following certificate: “* * * Did the court err in withdrawing from the consideration of the jury (which was done by the instructions) the matters pleaded as a defense in the third count or division of the. [452]*452original answer filed herein on the tenth day of October, 1884; there having been some evidence upon the trial tending to sustain the allegations made in said third count of said answer?”

We have repeatedly held, and rule twelve of this court requires, that in order to confer jurisdiction on this court-in this class of cases it is necessary that the certificate shall set out and define the question which it is thought desirable should be determined; and we have held that the questions should be so explicit as -to render an examination of the record unnecessary. Votaw v. Corwin, 62 Iowa, 39. Under these rulings it is manifest that we ought not to be required to examine the record to ascertain what question in the case we are called upon to determine. The certificate, without more, is unintelligible. The appeal will be

Dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bennett v. Parker, 25 N.W. 700, 67 Iowa 451 (iowa 1885).

25 N.W. 700 (Bennett v. Parker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sloss v. Bailey
74 N.W. 17 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1898)
Martin Steam-Feed Cooker Co. v. Olive
47 N.W. 980 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1891)
Des Moines Insurance v. Briley
44 N.W. 715 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1890)