Holmes v. Wright
This text of 3 Bradf. 37 (Holmes v. Wright) 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.
Opinion
The first assignment of errors in- this case alleges that the writ summons the defendant to appear in the District Court of Muscatine county while the venue in the declaration is laid in Johnson county. This is a matter of form which might have been set right by special demurrer, but furnishes no ground for disturbing the judgment!
The other point, that the judgment being upon a promissory note by default no writ of enquiry was awarded and no verdict rendered upon the Same is sufficiently answered by referring to the statute and to the case of Davis vs. Morford et al. just decided.
The judgment below will therefore be affirmed.,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Bradf. 37, 1 Morris 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-wright-iowa-1841.