Journell v. Leighton
This text of 49 Iowa 601 (Journell v. Leighton) 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
It- is conceded by appellant’s counsel that a construction was placed upon this statute different from that for which he contends in McMenomy v. McMenomy, 22 Iowa, 148, and is impliedly admitted that, to reverse this ease, the decision in that must be overruled. That ease establishes a rule of property. It has been acquiesced in for more than ten years. Many titles, it may well be supposed, have been acquired under and rest upon it. Eight or wrong we would not now be justified in departing from it, and introducing the confusion which would result from the establishment of a different rule. If any different rule is now to obtain, it must be provided by the legislature. In saying this we are not to be understood as intimating that the rule established is wrong, nor that it ought to be changed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
49 Iowa 601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/journell-v-leighton-iowa-1878.