Rush v. Barnhill
This text of 255 N.W. 491 (Rush v. Barnhill) 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
A jury was duly impaneled for the trial of this case in the district court. At the close of plaintiff’s case the defendant moved for a directed verdict. The trial court, being satisfied that the motion should be sustained, declined to hear argument upon it, and announced that the motion would be sustained. Upon such announcement being orally made by the court, counsel for plaintiff immediately announced in open court his dismissal of the case without prejudice. The trial court construed this announcement to be a motion to dismiss, and entered an order dismissing the case without prejudice at plaintiff’s costs. From this order the defendant appeals.
The exact question presented by this appeal came before this court in Pisel v. Incorporated Town of Mt. Vernon, 99 N. W. 568. In that case this court sustained a dismissal made under the circumstances disclosed by the record in this case. Following the rule announced in that case, the order appealed from is affirmed. A motion to dismiss the appeal was ordered submitted with the case. The motion is overruled.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
255 N.W. 491, 218 Iowa 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rush-v-barnhill-iowa-1934.