Tbe rule in Iowa

1963In tbe case of breach of warranty of quality, such loss, in tbe absence of special circumstances showing proximate damage of a greater amount, is tbe difference between the value of tbe goods at tbe time of delivery to the buyer and tbe value they would have bad if they bad answered to tbe warranty.” ' Tbe rule set out. in subsection 7, supra, is recognized in Drager v. Carlson Hybrid Corn Co., Inc., 244 Iowa 78, 86 , 56 N.W.2d 18, 23 , and is stated in somewhat more general terms in Kelly v. Emary, 242 Iowa 683, 690 , 45 N.W.2d 866, 871 .

1963In tbe case of breach of warranty of quality, such loss, in tbe absence of special circumstances showing proximate damage of a greater amount, is tbe difference between the value of tbe goods at tbe time of delivery to the buyer and tbe value they would have bad if they bad answered to tbe warranty.” ' Tbe rule set out. in subsection 7, supra, is recognized in Drager v. Carlson Hybrid Corn Co., Inc., 244 Iowa 78, 86 , 56 N.W.2d 18, 23 , and is stated in somewhat more general terms in Kelly v. Emary, 242 Iowa 683, 690 , 45 N.W.2d 866, 871 .

1963In tbe case of breach of warranty of quality, such loss, in tbe absence of special circumstances showing proximate damage of a greater amount, is tbe difference between the value of tbe goods at tbe time of delivery to the buyer and tbe value they would have bad if they bad answered to tbe warranty.” ' Tbe rule set out. in subsection 7, supra, is recognized in Drager v. Carlson Hybrid Corn Co., Inc., 244 Iowa 78, 86 , 56 N.W.2d 18, 23 , and is stated in somewhat more general terms in Kelly v. Emary, 242 Iowa 683, 690 , 45 N.W.2d 866, 871 .

1963In tbe case of breach of warranty of quality, such loss, in tbe absence of special circumstances showing proximate damage of a greater amount, is tbe difference between the value of tbe goods at tbe time of delivery to the buyer and tbe value they would have bad if they bad answered to tbe warranty.” ' Tbe rule set out. in subsection 7, supra, is recognized in Drager v. Carlson Hybrid Corn Co., Inc., 244 Iowa 78, 86 , 56 N.W.2d 18, 23 , and is stated in somewhat more general terms in Kelly v. Emary, 242 Iowa 683, 690 , 45 N.W.2d 866, 871 .

1960In re Community School District of Malvern, 250 Iowa 1240 , 98 N.W.2d 737 .

1960In re Community School District of Malvern, 250 Iowa 1240 , 98 N.W.2d 737 .

1959Nor do we have a case where an industrial plant in the process of its operation is emitting noxious fumes, as in Riter v. Keokuk Electro-Metals Co., 248 Iowa 710 , 82 N.W.2d 151 . *11 Tbe motion to direct a verdict for the defendants was properly sustained. — Affirmed.

1959Nor do we have a case where an industrial plant in the process of its operation is emitting noxious fumes, as in Riter v. Keokuk Electro-Metals Co., 248 Iowa 710 , 82 N.W.2d 151 . *11 Tbe motion to direct a verdict for the defendants was properly sustained. — Affirmed.

1957Co. v. Long, 243 Iowa 514 , 51 N.W.2d 135 ; but it does not excuse the railway company from using reasonable means to warn and protect. *669 Tbe defendant further points out that there were a number of lights of filling stations and spotlights on gas storage tanks in the vicinity of the Lindquist accident which shone in the eyes of approaching motorists and shadowed the crossing.

1957Co. v. Long, 243 Iowa 514 , 51 N.W.2d 135 ; but it does not excuse the railway company from using reasonable means to warn and protect. *669 Tbe defendant further points out that there were a number of lights of filling stations and spotlights on gas storage tanks in the vicinity of the Lindquist accident which shone in the eyes of approaching motorists and shadowed the crossing.

1952Yet in Winkelman v. General Motors Corp., 44 F. Supp. 960,970 , in a derivative suit there was a settlement with the complainant in which the corporation was paid -$4,500,000 and counsel fees and expenses of $795,000 were allowed. *833 Tbe hearing upon this application was had in the district court and it was submitted on evidence and argument from each side.

1947R. 872, at 873, it is stated: “Tbe rule is well established that where tbe loss of memory or other incapacity rendering tbe survivor of an accident incapable of testifying as to the accident, is shown to be attributable to such accident, it will be presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that he exercised due care. ’ ’ The foregoing rule is followed in Breker v. Rosema, 301 Mich. 685 , 4 N. W. 2d 57 , 141 A. L.

1947R. 872, at 873, it is stated: “Tbe rule is well established that where tbe loss of memory or other incapacity rendering tbe survivor of an accident incapable of testifying as to the accident, is shown to be attributable to such accident, it will be presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that he exercised due care. ’ ’ The foregoing rule is followed in Breker v. Rosema, 301 Mich. 685 , 4 N. W. 2d 57 , 141 A. L.

1947R. 867; Hoppe v. Bradshaw, 42 Cal. App. 2d 334 , 108 P. 2d 947 ; Scott v. Sheedy, 39 Cal. App. 2d 96 , 102 P. 2d 575 ; Stotler v. Chicago & A. Ry.

1947R. 867; Hoppe v. Bradshaw, 42 Cal. App. 2d 334 , 108 P. 2d 947 ; Scott v. Sheedy, 39 Cal. App. 2d 96 , 102 P. 2d 575 ; Stotler v. Chicago & A. Ry.

1947R. 867; Hoppe v. Bradshaw, 42 Cal. App. 2d 334 , 108 P. 2d 947 ; Scott v. Sheedy, 39 Cal. App. 2d 96 , 102 P. 2d 575 ; Stotler v. Chicago & A. Ry.

1947R. 867; Hoppe v. Bradshaw, 42 Cal. App. 2d 334 , 108 P. 2d 947 ; Scott v. Sheedy, 39 Cal. App. 2d 96 , 102 P. 2d 575 ; Stotler v. Chicago & A. Ry.

1942Shaffer v. Des Moines Coal Co., 122 Iowa, 233 ; Schoonover v. Osborne, 117 Iowa, 427 .

1942Shaffer v. Des Moines Coal Co., 122 Iowa, 233 ; Schoonover v. Osborne, 117 Iowa, 427 .

1939In tbe case of Re Estate of Talbott, 209 Iowa 1, 4 , 224 N. W. 550, 552 , this court said: “It is tbe general and well recognized rule that tlie necessary legal elements to establish a novation are parties capable of contracting, a valid prior obligation to be displaced, tbe consent óf all parties to tbe substitution, based on sufficient consideration, tbe extinction of tbe old obligation, and tbe creation of a new one.” In Reimers v. Tonne, 207 Iowa 1011 , at page 1016, 221 N. W. 574 , at page 576, this court said: “ It is a familiar rule that tbe mere fact of tbe making of a new contract by

1939In tbe case of Re Estate of Talbott, 209 Iowa 1, 4 , 224 N. W. 550, 552 , this court said: “It is tbe general and well recognized rule that tlie necessary legal elements to establish a novation are parties capable of contracting, a valid prior obligation to be displaced, tbe consent óf all parties to tbe substitution, based on sufficient consideration, tbe extinction of tbe old obligation, and tbe creation of a new one.” In Reimers v. Tonne, 207 Iowa 1011 , at page 1016, 221 N. W. 574 , at page 576, this court said: “ It is a familiar rule that tbe mere fact of tbe making of a new contract by

1939In tbe case of Re Estate of Talbott, 209 Iowa 1, 4 , 224 N. W. 550, 552 , this court said: “It is tbe general and well recognized rule that tlie necessary legal elements to establish a novation are parties capable of contracting, a valid prior obligation to be displaced, tbe consent óf all parties to tbe substitution, based on sufficient consideration, tbe extinction of tbe old obligation, and tbe creation of a new one.” In Reimers v. Tonne, 207 Iowa 1011 , at page 1016, 221 N. W. 574 , at page 576, this court said: “ It is a familiar rule that tbe mere fact of tbe making of a new contract by

1939In tbe case of Re Estate of Talbott, 209 Iowa 1, 4 , 224 N. W. 550, 552 , this court said: “It is tbe general and well recognized rule that tlie necessary legal elements to establish a novation are parties capable of contracting, a valid prior obligation to be displaced, tbe consent óf all parties to tbe substitution, based on sufficient consideration, tbe extinction of tbe old obligation, and tbe creation of a new one.” In Reimers v. Tonne, 207 Iowa 1011 , at page 1016, 221 N. W. 574 , at page 576, this court said: “ It is a familiar rule that tbe mere fact of tbe making of a new contract by

1936Savings Deposit and Trust Co. v. Cahn, 102 Md. 530 , 62 Atl. 819 ; Martin v. First Nat.

1936Savings Deposit and Trust Co. v. Cahn, 102 Md. 530 , 62 Atl. 819 ; Martin v. First Nat.

1928L. 41 ( 56 Atl. 247 ) ; Hynes v. Hickey, 109 Mich. 188 ( 66 N. W. 1090 ); Dedric v. Hopson, 62 Iowa 562 ; Texas & P. R.

1928L. 41 ( 56 Atl. 247 ) ; Hynes v. Hickey, 109 Mich. 188 ( 66 N. W. 1090 ); Dedric v. Hopson, 62 Iowa 562 ; Texas & P. R.

1928L. 41 ( 56 Atl. 247 ) ; Hynes v. Hickey, 109 Mich. 188 ( 66 N. W. 1090 ); Dedric v. Hopson, 62 Iowa 562 ; Texas & P. R.

1928Tbe objection that evidence is incompetent is sufficient where the evidence is incompetent for any purpose. 9 Encyc. of Evidence 73; Iverson v. McDonnell, 36 Wash. 73 ( 78 Pac. 202 ); State v. Hendrick, 70 N. J.

1928Tbe objection that evidence is incompetent is sufficient where the evidence is incompetent for any purpose. 9 Encyc. of Evidence 73; Iverson v. McDonnell, 36 Wash. 73 ( 78 Pac. 202 ); State v. Hendrick, 70 N. J.

1928L. 41 ( 56 Atl. 247 ) ; Hynes v. Hickey, 109 Mich. 188 ( 66 N. W. 1090 ); Dedric v. Hopson, 62 Iowa 562 ; Texas & P. R.

1926In tbe recent ease of Shea v. Keith, 200 Iowa 300 , we said: “Tbe rule is well stated in Farmers Loan & Tr.

1926Men’s Assn., 184 Iowa 423 , as follows: “Tbe rule, clearly deducible from the overwhelming weight of authority, is that, when injury or death follows or results from a voluntary act of tbe insured, and the act is one which is not manifestly dangerous, but which is ordinarily done or performed without serious consequences to the doer, such result is caused by accidental means.

1926Co. v. Scheetz, 196 Iowa 692 , a case very similar to tbe one before us, where we said: ‘A failing debtor may lawfully exhaust his property to secure or pay some of his creditors, leaving others unprotected, provided only that his purpose in so doing is not tainted with intent to hinder or delay the creditors left, unsecured.

1922As bearing on this question, see Hanson v. Hammett, 107 Iowa 171 . 2.

1909Churchill v. Morse, 23 Iowa, 229 ; Spaan v. Anderson, 115 Iowa, 121 .

1909Churchill v. Morse, 23 Iowa, 229 ; Spaan v. Anderson, 115 Iowa, 121 .

1905In Hileman v. Bouslaugh, 13 Pa. 344 ( 53 Am Dec. 474 ), Chief Justice Gibson protested that Tbe rule in Shelley’s Case ill deserves the epithets bestowed on it in tbe argument.

1905Lewis v. Schultz, 98 Iowa, 341 ; Powell v. Deveney, 3 Cush. 300 ( 50 Am.

1905Elevator Co. v. U. P. Ry., 97 Iowa, 719 .

1901Fairbairn v. Dana, 68 Iowa, 230 .

1900Tbe doctrine that such a promise amounts to an estoppel has apparently been recognized in this state in Bishop v. Insurance Co., 69 Iowa, 184 , although it appears that the limitation therein waived ■was created by contract, and not by law.