22 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1858–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Dutcher v. Lewisgreen2 sentences1986See Goetzman v. Wichern, 327 N.W.2d 742, 745 (Iowa 1982) (quoting Dutcher v. Lewis, 221 N.W.2d 755, 759 (Iowa 1974) ("the test is whether the exception taken alerted the trial court to the error which is urged on appeal.")). 1986See Goetzman v. Wichern, 327 N.W.2d 742, 745 (Iowa 1982) (quoting Dutcher v. Lewis, 221 N.W.2d 755, 759 (Iowa 1974) (“the test is whether the exception taken alerted the trial court to the error which is urged on appeal.”)). | 4 | 4 |
State v. Baskingreen2 sentences1986The purpose is “to afford the trial judge an opportunity to catch exactly what is in counsel’s mind and thereby determine whether the objection possesses merit to an extent the instruction should be recast.” State v. Baskin, 220 N.W.2d 882, 886 (Iowa 1974). 1985The purpose is “to afford the trial judge an opportunity to catch exactly what is in counsel’s mind and thereby de *738 termine whether the objection possesses merit...” Goetzman, 327 N.W.2d at 745 (quoting State v. Baskin, 220 N.W.2d 882, 886 (Iowa 1974)). | 3 | 4 |
Harrington v. Stategreen2 sentences2016See Harrington v. State, 659 N.W.2d 509, 521 (Iowa 2003). 2016See Zaabel, 2016 WL 4035236 , at *3 (citing Harrington v. State, 659 N.W.2d 509, 521 (Iowa 2003)). | 2 | 2 |
Goetzman v. Wicherngreen2 sentences1986See Goetzman v. Wichern, 327 N.W.2d 742, 745 (Iowa 1982) (quoting Dutcher v. Lewis, 221 N.W.2d 755, 759 (Iowa 1974) ("the test is whether the exception taken alerted the trial court to the error which is urged on appeal.")). 1986See Goetzman v. Wichern, 327 N.W.2d 742, 745 (Iowa 1982) (quoting Dutcher v. Lewis, 221 N.W.2d 755, 759 (Iowa 1974) (“the test is whether the exception taken alerted the trial court to the error which is urged on appeal.”)). | 2 | 2 |
State of Iowa v. Lee Samuel Christensengreen1 sentence2026See id. at 653–57, 679–80. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Fountaingreen1 sentence2016See id. at 266 . | 1 | 1 |
National Loan Investors, L.P. v. Martingreen2 sentences2016The test of this defense is Meisels’s “excusable ignorance of the contents” of the lease agreement and Meisels having “had no reasonable opportunity to obtain knowledge.” Martin, 488 N.W.2d at 167 (citation omitted). 2016Unless this test is met, a defense based on misrepresentation is “cut off by a holder in due course.” Id. at 168 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Pennsylvania Life Insurance Co. v. Simonigreen1 sentence2016Co. v. Simoni, 641 N.W.2d 807, 812 (Iowa 2002). | 1 | 1 |
Tjeerdsma v. Global Steel Buildings, Inc.green1 sentence1998In Tjeerdsma v. Global Steel Buildings, Inc., 466 N.W.2d 643, 645 (S.D.1991), the South Dakota Supreme Court stated as follows: An arbitration agreement may be waived. | 1 | 1 |
Froman v. Perringreen1 sentence1974Pose v. Roosevelt Hotel Company, 208 N.W.2d 19, 25 (Iowa 1973); Froman v. Perrin, 213 N.W.2d 684, 689-690 (Iowa 1973); and State v. Baskin, 220 N.W.2d 882 , division II, (Iowa 1974). | 1 | 1 |
Pose v. ROOSEVELT HOTEL COMAPNYgreen1 sentence1974Pose v. Roosevelt Hotel Company, 208 N.W.2d 19, 25 (Iowa 1973); Froman v. Perrin, 213 N.W.2d 684, 689-690 (Iowa 1973); and State v. Baskin, 220 N.W.2d 882 , division II, (Iowa 1974). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Sandy Check
green
2 sentences2017Id. at 684 . 40 According to Check, error is harmless only if the court is sure the evidence did not influence the jury or had only slight effect. 2017Id. at 684 . 40 According to Check, error is harmless only if the court is sure the evidence did not influence the jury or had only slight effect. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Wesley Retirement Services, Inc. v. Hansen Lind Meyer, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002It requires “conduct or activity inconsistent with the right to arbitration and prejudice to the party claiming waiv *813 er Wesley Retirement, 594 N.W.2d at 30 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Knox
green
1 sentence1997Knox, 536 N.W.2d at 739 . 1. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Seela v. Haye
green
2 sentences1973In support of his contention set out at the beginning of this division defendant relies primarily on Seela v. Haye, 256 Iowa 606 , 128 N.W.2d 279 . 1973In support of his contention set out at the beginning of this division defendant relies primarily on Seela v. Haye, 256 Iowa 606 , 128 N.W.2d 279 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Maland v. Tesdall
green
2 sentences1967But we see nothing in the record to indicate that the offer was not made in good faith, nor can we presume that appellant was or could have been prejudiced thereby.” It further observed, “if the fact of offering incompetent or immaterial testimony, which is excluded, is to be held a cause for granting a new trial, few, if any, verdicts could stand the test of such rule.” Reference was also made to the case of Maland v. Tesdall, 232 Iowa 959 , 5 N.W.2d 327 , which considered a like contention. 1967But we see nothing in the record to indicate that the offer was not made in good faith, nor can we presume that appellant was or could have been prejudiced thereby.” It further observed, “if the fact of offering incompetent or immaterial testimony, which is excluded, is to be held a cause for granting a new trial, few, if any, verdicts could stand the test of such rule.” Reference was also made to the case of Maland v. Tesdall, 232 Iowa 959 , 5 N.W.2d 327 , which considered a like contention. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Rosenberg v. Underwriters Salvage Co.
neutral
1 sentence1920Rosenberg v. Underwriters Salvage Co., 190 Ill. | 1 | 1920–1920 |
State v. Roscum
green
1 sentence1918In State v. Moon, 167 Iowa 26 , State v. Blydenburg, 135 Iowa 264 , and State v. Roscum, 119 Iowa 330 , questions were contumaciously repeated, in utter disregard of the court’s ruling, and on this ground the conduct was denounced as prejudicial. | 1 | 1918–1918 |
State v. Blydenburg
green
1 sentence1918In State v. Moon, 167 Iowa 26 , State v. Blydenburg, 135 Iowa 264 , and State v. Roscum, 119 Iowa 330 , questions were contumaciously repeated, in utter disregard of the court’s ruling, and on this ground the conduct was denounced as prejudicial. | 1 | 1918–1918 |
State v. Moon
green
1 sentence1918In State v. Moon, 167 Iowa 26 , State v. Blydenburg, 135 Iowa 264 , and State v. Roscum, 119 Iowa 330 , questions were contumaciously repeated, in utter disregard of the court’s ruling, and on this ground the conduct was denounced as prejudicial. | 1 | 1918–1918 |
State v. Little
green
1 sentence1895But it was held in State v. Little, supra, that the minutes of the evidence returned with the indictment and duly filed are made the test and standard by which to determine whether the names of all the witnesses examined before the grand jury are indorsed on the indictment, and that the affidavits by grand jurors or other witnesses cannot be received, as the record made by the filing of the minutes of the evidence returned with the indictment is conclusive. 4 It is urged that the admissions of the county attorney are sufficient to show that the indictment should be set aside on the grounds sta | 1 | 1895–1895 |
Rowley v. Van Benthuysen
green
1 sentence1858In New York, since the case of Rowley v. Benthuysen, 16 Wend., 369 , that case has been regarded as establishing the true rule, and has been followed, being referred to gen erally in the subsequent cases, as giving the test rule. | 1 | 1858–1858 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.