Marquardt v. Flaugher

Supreme Court of Iowa

Marquardt v. Flaugher

14 N.W. 214, 60 Iowa 148

CourtSupreme Court of Iowa

DecidedDecember 8, 1882

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 14 N.W. 214 (Marquardt v. Flaugher) 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

Marquardt v. Flaugher, 14 N.W. 214, 60 Iowa 148 (iowa 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

Day, J.

I. The evidence shows that the watch and chain were purchased by J. R. Flaugher and presented to. his wife, the appellant, and that they have been used by her, and occasionally by her daughter. The evidence further shows that the other articles of jewelry were used in the defendant’s family, with the exception of one ring, of the value of three dollars. It further appears that the defendant did not know that the articles were not paid for, until within about one year of the time suit was commenced. The articles in question constitute a family expense, under the doctrine of Smedly v. Felt, 41 Iowa, 588. The court did not err in rendering judgment against the appellant therefor.

II. It is insisted that the court erred in rendering judgment against appellant for ten per'cent interest, inasmuch as she is not a party to the note. From the amount of the judgment it is apparent that the interest up to the time of the rendition of the judgment was computed at six per cent. The judgment itself, however, draws interest at ten per cent. It is conceded by appellee that this is a mistake. If the attention of the court below had been called to this condition of the record, doubtless it would have been corrected, and the necessity for an appeal on this ground would have been obviated. The judgment will be modified so as to draw six .per cent interest. The appellant wil.1 pay the costs of appeal.

Modified and Affirmed.

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

Day, J.

I. The evidence shows that the watch and chain were purchased by J. R. Flaugher and presented to. his wife, the appellant, and that they have been used by her, and occasionally by her daughter. The evidence further shows that the other articles of jewelry were used in the defendant’s family, with the exception of one ring, of the value of three dollars. It further appears that the defendant did not know that the articles were not paid for, until within about one year of the time suit was commenced. The articles in question constitute a family expense, under the doctrine of Smedly v. Felt, 41 Iowa, 588. The court did not err in rendering judgment against the appellant therefor.

II. It is insisted that the court erred in rendering judgment against appellant for ten per'cent interest, inasmuch as she is not a party to the note. From the amount of the judgment it is apparent that the interest up to the time of the rendition of the judgment was computed at six per cent. The judgment itself, however, draws interest at ten per cent. It is conceded by appellee that this is a mistake. If the attention of the court below had been called to this condition of the record, doubtless it would have been corrected, and the necessity for an appeal on this ground would have been obviated. The judgment will be modified so as to draw six .per cent interest. The appellant wil.1 pay the costs of appeal.

Modified and Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 N.W. 214, 60 Iowa 148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marquardt-v-flaugher-iowa-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack