TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Crawford v. White

Crawford and Kimball, Executors v. White

Crawford v. White, 17 Iowa 560 (1864)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Iowa · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 13, 1864
Judges
Weight
Citations
17 Iowa 560
Headnotes
1. Attorney: compromise. Where a party employs counsel to represent him in a cause pending, and such counsel in good faith compromises the suit and consents to judgment for a specific amount, such party cannot, in an action brought upon such judgment (the same being recovered in another State and sued on in this), defeat a recovery upon the same for want of authority in his attorney to give his consent and make such compromise. 2. - equitable depense. When in such a case defendant filed an answer in the nature of an equitable defense, to set aside and have declared invalid the judgment so recovered, alleging generally as a ground of such equitable relief that his attorney had colluded and combined with the attorney of plaintiff in consenting to such confession and judgment, and when the fair construction of such allegation indicated that it was based upon an allegation of want of power to make such compromise, and when it was not pretended or alleged that the defendant was not indebted to plaintiffs in the amount of such judgment, nor that the plaintiff had not a valid, subsisting indebtedness against him. Held, that the answer did not contain a substantial defense, and a demurrer thereto was properly sustained.
Summary
Appeal from Des Moines District Court. ACTION on a foreign judgment. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Weight

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

"Weight, Ch. J.

Plaintiffs sue upon a judgment recovered against defendant, in their favor, in the State of Vermont. Several answers and amendments thereto were filed. Without adverting to them and the facts at length, or the several positions assumed by appellant’s counsel, we may state the law governing the case, briefly as follows:

1. attor-hey: compromise, I. When a party employs counsel to appear for him and defend an action, and such counsel in good faith compromises said suit and consents to judgment for a . . specific amount, such party cannot, m an action brought upon such judgment (the same being recovered in another State and sued upon in this), defeat a recovery upon the same for want of authority in his attorney to make such compromise and give such consent. See Potter v. Parsons, 14 Iowa, 287 , and authorities there cited.

2. — "defense1.6 II. Where a defendant in such a case filed an answer in the nature of an equitable defense to set aside and have declared invalid the judgment so recovered, alleging generally, as a ground of such equitable relief, that his attorney had colluded and combined with the attorney of plaintiff in consenting to such compromise and judgment; and where a fair construction of such general allegation would indicate that it was based upon the prior allegation of a want of power to make such compromise; and where he does not pretend or allege that he is not indebted to the plaintiffs in the amount of such judgment, nor that plaintiffs have not a valid and subsisting indebtedness against him. Held, that the answer did not present a case entitling the party to equitable relief, and that a demurrer was properly, sustained thereto, for that the matter contained therein did not contain a substantial ground of defense.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1866–1867: 11876–1877: 11882–1883: 11884–1885: 21890–1891: 11902–1903: 11906–1907: 11922–1923: 11944–1945: 118662026peak 1884 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Commercial Credit Corp. v. Smith187 S.W.2d 363 (Tex. 1945)
  2. Wilson v. Hawthorne14 Colo. 530 (1890)
  3. Colson v. Leitch110 Ill. 504 (1884)
  4. Schleicher v. Markward61 Tex. 99 (1884)
  5. Ridgway v. City of Fort Worth243 S.W. 740 (Tex. App. 1922)
  6. Taggart v. Wood20 Iowa 236 (1866)

Most recent

  1. Commercial Credit Corp. v. Smith187 S.W.2d 363 (Tex. 1945)
  2. Ridgway v. City of Fort Worth243 S.W. 740 (Tex. App. 1922)
  3. Meyer v. Wilson76 N.E. 748 (Ind. 1906)
  4. Uehlein v. Burk94 N.W. 243 (Iowa 1903)
  5. Wilson v. Hawthorne14 Colo. 530 (1890)
  6. Colson v. Leitch110 Ill. 504 (1884)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list