TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Blandon v. Glover

Blandon v. Glover, 25 N.W. 830 (Iowa 1885)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Iowa · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 14, 1885
Judges
Adams
Citations
25 N.W. 83067 Iowa 615
Headnotes
1. Practice: amendment to conform pleading to evidence encouraged. The statute, and the practice under it, as shown by the decisions, ace very liberal in allowing amendments, and especially where the object is to conform the pleadings to the evidence; and it was error in this case to sustain a motion to strike such amendment from the files, after it had been filed with leave of the court.
Summary
Appeal from Buena Vista District Court. Action to recover the price of- a cow alleged to have been sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. There was a trial to a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered for plaintiff. The 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 — Adams

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

Adams, J.

After the defendant had introduced his evidence and rested, he asked leave to file an amended and substituted answer, for the purpose of conforming his answer to the evidence. Leave was granted, but afterwards, upon motion filed by the plaintiff, the amended and substituted answer was stricken from the files. The case, involving less *616 than $100, comes to us upon a certificate, and one of the questions certified is as to whether the court erred in striking the amended and substituted answer from the tiles. In our opinion it did. Our statute, and practice under it, as shown by the decisions, are very liberal in allowing amendments, and especially ivliere the object is to make the pleadings conform to the evidence. It is, to be sure, objected in this case that the amended and substituted answer did not conform to the evidence. But it did so in the main, and the difference, if any, was not such, we think, as to justify the court in striking it from the files.

Some other questions are certified, but they will probably not arise upon another trial.

Reversed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1892: 11906: 11923: 11930: 11931: 118922026peak 1892 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Le Mars Building & Loan Ass'n v. Burgess105 N.W. 641 (Iowa 1906) · Dissent
  2. Fisher v. McCarty197 Iowa 369 (1923)
  3. Eilers v. Frieling234 N.W. 275 (Iowa 1931)
  4. Crismon v. Deck51 N.W. 55 (Iowa 1892)
  5. A. Y. McDonald Co. v. Morrison228 N.W. 878 (Iowa 1930)

Most recent

  1. Eilers v. Frieling234 N.W. 275 (Iowa 1931)
  2. A. Y. McDonald Co. v. Morrison228 N.W. 878 (Iowa 1930)
  3. Fisher v. McCarty197 Iowa 369 (1923)
  4. Le Mars Building & Loan Ass'n v. Burgess105 N.W. 641 (Iowa 1906) · Dissent
  5. Crismon v. Deck51 N.W. 55 (Iowa 1892)

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