Powesheik County v. Mickel

10 Iowa 76
Supreme Court of Iowa·Decided November 8, 1859·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

Wright, C. J.

The motion for the change of venue was overruled, for the reason that the defendant did not show that the cause alleged had come to his knowledge since the last continuance. This, it is admittedJie was required to do, [77] unless excused therefrom by the condition of the pleadings, And the argument is that previous to the term at which the application was made, the answer stood undenied, that the issue was not made up, and that defendant could not therefore sooner know that the change would be necessary.

According to the rule recognized in Stacy & Thomas v. Stichton & Co., 9 Iowa 399, the issue was complete without the replication, and the application as a consequence -was too late. Wo think that case, in its principle, governs this.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Powesheik County v. Mickel, 10 Iowa 76 (iowa 1859).

10 Iowa 76 (Powesheik County v. Mickel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brenton Bros. & Leach v. Hill
197 Iowa 125 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1924)
Howerton v. Augustine
106 N.W. 941 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1906)
Conkling v. . Weatherwax
73 N.E. 1023 (New York Court of Appeals, 1905)