Union Mutual Life Co. v. Waddell

Supreme Court of Iowa

Union Mutual Life Co. v. Waddell

268 N.W. 149, 221 Iowa 1373

CourtSupreme Court of Iowa

DecidedJune 19, 1936

DocketNo. 43490.

StatusPublished

This text of 268 N.W. 149 (Union Mutual Life Co. v. Waddell) 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

Union Mutual Life Co. v. Waddell, 268 N.W. 149, 221 Iowa 1373 (iowa 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

*1374 Albert, J.

Plaintiff foreclosed a mortgage against the defendants and their city property. Sale was had and subsequently an application was made for an extension of time of redemption under the statute, which was granted, and the rental of the property fixed at $35 per month. In February 1935, a second application was made for extension of time of redemption under the second moratorium statute, and the matter came on for hearing.

Plaintiff introduced no evidence as to why the second moratorium should not be granted extending the time of redemption until March 1, 1937, but did introduce evidence as to the rental value of the property, it being the residence of the defendants and occupied by them. On hearing, plaintiff, the owner of the sheriff’s certificate, made a conditional offer of $55 per month as rental of the property; and introduced evidence which we have carefully reviewed, and at the close of the testimony the court granted the extension of time and fixed the rental value of the property at $35 per month.

Plaintiff now insists that because it offered $55 per month rental the court erred. With this we do not agree. The offer made by the plaintiff as to the rental was a conditional offer, describing numerous conditions and provisos in connection with the offer. We are contented with the order of the court fixing the rental at $35 per month for the balance of the term.

The court, however, in its order, provided that: “If the plaintiff appeals to the supreme court of Iowa, the defendants need not pay the monthly rental of $35.” There is no authority whatever for this part of the order, and the same is hereby cancelled. There is no authority in the statute for penalizing a party for appealing. The granting of the extension of time and the fixing of the monthly rental at $35 has our approval. The original order made herein is modified accordingly. — Modified and affirmed.

Donegan, C. J., and Parsons, Stiger, Richards, Anderson, and Mitchell, JJ., concur.

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

*1374 Albert, J.

Plaintiff foreclosed a mortgage against the defendants and their city property. Sale was had and subsequently an application was made for an extension of time of redemption under the statute, which was granted, and the rental of the property fixed at $35 per month. In February 1935, a second application was made for extension of time of redemption under the second moratorium statute, and the matter came on for hearing.

Plaintiff introduced no evidence as to why the second moratorium should not be granted extending the time of redemption until March 1, 1937, but did introduce evidence as to the rental value of the property, it being the residence of the defendants and occupied by them. On hearing, plaintiff, the owner of the sheriff’s certificate, made a conditional offer of $55 per month as rental of the property; and introduced evidence which we have carefully reviewed, and at the close of the testimony the court granted the extension of time and fixed the rental value of the property at $35 per month.

Plaintiff now insists that because it offered $55 per month rental the court erred. With this we do not agree. The offer made by the plaintiff as to the rental was a conditional offer, describing numerous conditions and provisos in connection with the offer. We are contented with the order of the court fixing the rental at $35 per month for the balance of the term.

The court, however, in its order, provided that: “If the plaintiff appeals to the supreme court of Iowa, the defendants need not pay the monthly rental of $35.” There is no authority whatever for this part of the order, and the same is hereby cancelled. There is no authority in the statute for penalizing a party for appealing. The granting of the extension of time and the fixing of the monthly rental at $35 has our approval. The original order made herein is modified accordingly. — Modified and affirmed.

Donegan, C. J., and Parsons, Stiger, Richards, Anderson, and Mitchell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 N.W. 149, 221 Iowa 1373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-mutual-life-co-v-waddell-iowa-1936.