Smith v. Merchants' Despatch Transportation Co.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Smith v. Merchants' Despatch Transportation Co.

45 Iowa 705

DecidedApril 4, 1877

StatusPublished

This text of 45 Iowa 705 (Smith v. Merchants' Despatch Transportation Co.) 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

Smith v. Merchants' Despatch Transportation Co., 45 Iowa 705 (iowa 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Bothrock, J.

The same questions are presented in this case which are determined in the case of Robinson Bros. & Gifford v. The Merchants Despatch Transportation Co., p. 470, ante.

In this case the goods destroyed by fire were owned by the plaintiff and two other parties in separate parcels. It was averred in the petition that the other owners had assigned their claims to the plaintiff. There was a general denial in the answer. It is claimed by appellant that there was no [706]*706proof of the alleged assignments to plaintiff. The plaintiff in his testimony ■' states that “ the said claims against the defendant are my property.’' There is no evidence in the record in conflict with this as to the ownersliip of the claims, and we think this proof of ownership was sufficient to support the allegation of the petition that plaintiff was the owner by assignment.

Affirmed.

Adams, J., took no part in the determination of this case, and Seevebs, J., dissents.

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

Bothrock, J.

The same questions are presented in this case which are determined in the case of Robinson Bros. & Gifford v. The Merchants Despatch Transportation Co., p. 470, ante.

In this case the goods destroyed by fire were owned by the plaintiff and two other parties in separate parcels. It was averred in the petition that the other owners had assigned their claims to the plaintiff. There was a general denial in the answer. It is claimed by appellant that there was no [706]*706proof of the alleged assignments to plaintiff. The plaintiff in his testimony ■' states that “ the said claims against the defendant are my property.’' There is no evidence in the record in conflict with this as to the ownersliip of the claims, and we think this proof of ownership was sufficient to support the allegation of the petition that plaintiff was the owner by assignment.

Affirmed.

Adams, J., took no part in the determination of this case, and Seevebs, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 Iowa 705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-merchants-despatch-transportation-co-iowa-1877.