Gilruth v. Gilruth

20 Iowa 225
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedApril 10, 1866
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 20 Iowa 225 (Gilruth v. Gilruth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gilruth v. Gilruth, 20 Iowa 225 (iowa 1866).

Opinion

Lowe, Ch. J.

i. default: ?oamtruea. The point to be settled is, whether the court erred in setting aside the default and in granting a retrial of the cause. This was done by virtue of the supposed authority contained in section 8160 of the Revision, which provides that a defendant, served by publication only, and not appearing, against whom a judgment has been rendered, may, within two years thereafter, come into court, and move to have the action retried, &c.

There is certainly much in the preceding sections, and those which immediately follow (although some of them are now. repealed), tending to show that the operation of [227]*227the section in question was intended to be limited to actions in rem., as contended by counsel for appellant.

We do not wish, however, as it is not necessary, to commit ourselves in favor of this construction of the section at present. Nevertheless we unite in holding that it has no application to divorce suits. And we deem it scarcely important to suggest the considerations of hardship and even cruelty (finding, as they do, a sufficient illustration in the facts of the case at bar), which would ensue from the meaning that the defendant by her counsel seeks to give to said section, and which are of so controlling a nature ag effectually to negative the idea, that the legislature ever intended that it should have any such effect or operation.

It does not follow, however, that the defendant is without remedy of some kind, if in fact she has suffered injury from the wrongful acts of the plaintiff. But it is not our province to advise or even suggest what the same may be.

Reversed.

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

Related

Girdey v. Girdey
238 N.W. 432 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1931)
Comes v. Comes
190 Iowa 547 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1920)
Feldner v. Feldner
167 Iowa 150 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1914)
Tollefson v. Tollefson
114 N.W. 631 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1908)
Solomon v. Solomon
16 Ohio C.C. Dec. 307 (Cuyahoga Circuit Court, 1904)
Eaton v. Eaton
60 L.R.A. 605 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1902)
O'Connell v. O'Connell
10 Neb. 390 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1880)
Rush v. Rush
46 Iowa 648 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1877)
Whitcomb v. Whitcomb
46 Iowa 437 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Iowa 225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilruth-v-gilruth-iowa-1866.