In re Wolf

N.D. Iowa

In re Wolf

98 F. 74, 1899 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa

DecidedDecember 11, 1899

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 98 F. 74 (In re Wolf) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Wolf, 98 F. 74, 1899 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229 (N.D. Iowa 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

SHIRAS, District Judge.

Under the provisions of the Code of Iowa, a landlord is entitled to a lien for rent due upon personal property used or kept on the leased premises. In construing these provisions of the Code, the state supreme court has repeatedly held that if the landlord takes a mortgage on the property as a security for rent and other indebtedness, and so mingles or confuses the several claims that, if payments be made, it would be impossible to determine whether the payments were properly applicable to the rent or not, such action is deemed to be a waiver of the statutory lien. Smith v. Dayton, 94 Iowa, 102, 62 N. W. 650; Ladner v. Balsley, 103 Iowa, 679, 72 N. W. 787. The finding of the referee shows that in this case a note for $800 was executed and secured by a mortgage; it being intended by the parties that this note should include all the indebtedness due from the bankrupt to the creditor, including rental, money loaned, services rendered, and the like. The facts [75]*75bring Ílit» ease within the rule laid down by the supreme court of Iowa in the cases above cited, and the ruling of the referee that the claimant is not entitled to a landlord’s lien is affirmed.

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

SHIRAS, District Judge.

Under the provisions of the Code of Iowa, a landlord is entitled to a lien for rent due upon personal property used or kept on the leased premises. In construing these provisions of the Code, the state supreme court has repeatedly held that if the landlord takes a mortgage on the property as a security for rent and other indebtedness, and so mingles or confuses the several claims that, if payments be made, it would be impossible to determine whether the payments were properly applicable to the rent or not, such action is deemed to be a waiver of the statutory lien. Smith v. Dayton, 94 Iowa, 102, 62 N. W. 650; Ladner v. Balsley, 103 Iowa, 679, 72 N. W. 787. The finding of the referee shows that in this case a note for $800 was executed and secured by a mortgage; it being intended by the parties that this note should include all the indebtedness due from the bankrupt to the creditor, including rental, money loaned, services rendered, and the like. The facts [75]*75bring Ílit» ease within the rule laid down by the supreme court of Iowa in the cases above cited, and the ruling of the referee that the claimant is not entitled to a landlord’s lien is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 F. 74, 1899 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-wolf-iand-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack