Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1908–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wollgast v. Henninggreen2 sentences1970See Briley v. Madrid Improvement Co., 255 Iowa 388, 394 , 122 N.W.2d 824 ; In re Estate of Baker, 247 Iowa 1380, 1388 , 78 N.W.2d 863 ; In re Estate of Bernhard, 134 Iowa 603, 606-607 , 112 N.W. 86 ; 3 American Law of Property, (Casner ed.), § 14.13 at 611; cf. The Code 1966, Section 633.385(1). 1953"Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, nothing is better established than the equitable principle that land directed to be sold and turned into money is to be considered as that species of property into which it is directed to be converted and this is especially so where the direction is made in a will." In re Estate of Jackson, 217 Iowa 1046, 1050, 1051 , 252 N.W. 775, 777 , supra. "Where a testator in his will directs a sale of real estate, the property is thereby converted from realty to personalty, and, whenever the sale takes place, the proceeds arising therefrom are to be distribut | 1 | 2 |
Construx of Illinois, Inc. v. Kaisermangreen1 sentence2024Applying the equitable-conversion doctrine here carried out the 11 intent of the testators and did not circumvent public policy.12 See Construx of Ill., Inc. v. Kaiserman, 800 N.E.2d 1267, 1275 (Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Larson v. Metcalfgreen2 sentences1996See Larson v. Metcalf, 201 Iowa 1208, 1210-11 , 207 N.W. 382, 383 (1926). 1996See Larson v. Metcalf, 201 Iowa 1208, 1210-11 , 207 N.W. 382, 383 (1926). | 1 | 1 |
Ambrose v. Harrison Mutual Insurance Associationgreen1 sentence1976As stated in Ambrose v. Harrison Mutual Insurance Association, 206 N.W.2d 683, 685 (Iowa 1973): “[B]oth vendor and vendee under a contract of sale by which the equitable title passes to vendee have an insurable interest in the property. | 1 | 1 |
Briley v. Madrid Improvement Companygreen2 sentences1970See Briley v. Madrid Improvement Co., 255 Iowa 388, 394 , 122 N.W.2d 824 ; In re Estate of Baker, 247 Iowa 1380, 1388 , 78 N.W.2d 863 ; In re Estate of Bernhard, 134 Iowa 603, 606-607 , 112 N.W. 86 ; 3 American Law of Property, (Casner ed.), § 14.13 at 611; cf. The Code 1966, Section 633.385(1). 1970See Briley v. Madrid Improvement Co., 255 Iowa 388, 394 , 122 N.W.2d 824 ; In re Estate of Baker, 247 Iowa 1380, 1388 , 78 N.W.2d 863 ; In re Estate of Bernhard, 134 Iowa 603, 606-607 , 112 N.W. 86 ; 3 American Law of Property, (Casner ed.), § 14.13 at 611; cf. The Code 1966, Section 633.385(1). | 1 | 1 |
Martin v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.green2 sentences1953“Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, nothing is better established than the equitable principle that land directed to be sold and turned into money is to be considered as that species of property into'which it is directed to be converted, and this is especially so where the direction is made in a will.” In re Estate of Jackson, supra, 217 Iowa 1046, 1050, 1051 . 1953"Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, nothing is better established than the equitable principle that land directed to be sold and turned into money is to be considered as that species of property into which it is directed to be converted and this is especially so where the direction is made in a will." In re Estate of Jackson, 217 Iowa 1046, 1050, 1051 , 252 N.W. 775, 777 , supra. "Where a testator in his will directs a sale of real estate, the property is thereby converted from realty to personalty, and, whenever the sale takes place, the proceeds arising therefrom are to be distribut | 1 | 1 |
Brain v. Deangreen1 sentence1932See Blain v. Dean, 160 Iowa 708 . | 1 | 1 |
Gould v. Taylor Orphan Asylumgreen1 sentence1912See, as supporting this view, Gould v. Asylum, 46 Wis. 106 ( 50 N. W. 422 ); Dodge v. Williams, 46 Wis. 70 ( 1 N. W. 92 , 50 N. W. 1103 ). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Inghram v. Chandler
green
1 sentence2024The “real purpose” of the equitable-conversion doctrine “is to give effect to the manifest intent of a testator.” See Ingraham v. Chandler, 161 N.W. 434 , 435 (Iowa 1917). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Pierce v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence1998We recently reviewed this doctrine of equitable conversion, applicable to executory real estate contracts, in Pierce v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co., 548 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1996). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
In Re Baker's Estate
green
2 sentences1970See Briley v. Madrid Improvement Co., 255 Iowa 388, 394 , 122 N.W.2d 824 ; In re Estate of Baker, 247 Iowa 1380, 1388 , 78 N.W.2d 863 ; In re Estate of Bernhard, 134 Iowa 603, 606-607 , 112 N.W. 86 ; 3 American Law of Property, (Casner ed.), § 14.13 at 611; cf. The Code 1966, Section 633.385(1). 1970See Briley v. Madrid Improvement Co., 255 Iowa 388, 394 , 122 N.W.2d 824 ; In re Estate of Baker, 247 Iowa 1380, 1388 , 78 N.W.2d 863 ; In re Estate of Bernhard, 134 Iowa 603, 606-607 , 112 N.W. 86 ; 3 American Law of Property, (Casner ed.), § 14.13 at 611; cf. The Code 1966, Section 633.385(1). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
In re the Estate of Miller
green
2 sentences1942A. 19171), 713, we said, in discussing the doctrine of equitable conversion: 1 ‘ ® * ° Its real purpose is to give effect to the manifest intent of a testator or vendor, and to treat that as done which by will the testator has directed to he done, or that which, by previous contract with another, both have mutually bound themselves to do. * * * Taking the typical case of equitable conversion by contract, as above stated, we are fully committed to the doctrine that such a contract works an equitable conversion ; that, in case of the death of the vendor, Ms interest in the contract would pass as 1942A. 19171), 713, we said, in discussing the doctrine of equitable conversion: 1 ‘ ® * ° Its real purpose is to give effect to the manifest intent of a testator or vendor, and to treat that as done which by will the testator has directed to he done, or that which, by previous contract with another, both have mutually bound themselves to do. * * * Taking the typical case of equitable conversion by contract, as above stated, we are fully committed to the doctrine that such a contract works an equitable conversion ; that, in case of the death of the vendor, Ms interest in the contract would pass as | 1 | 1942–1942 |
In Re Estate of Sheeler
green
2 sentences1940The question of conversion is one of intention, and the question is, Is it the testator’s intent to have his real estate converted into personalty immediately upon his death?” ’ ” Later in the case (In re Estate of Sanford) we said, page 838 of 188 Iowa, page 508 of 175 N. W.: “If, on the other hand, such absolute, imperative necessity existed, then the intention of the testator to work an equitable conversion of the real estate will be implied.” (Citing our former holdings and the general rule from other states.) A more recent case discussing the general provisions of the doctrine of equitabl 1940The question of conversion is one of intention, and the question is, Is it the testator’s intent to have his real estate converted into personalty immediately upon his death?” ’ ” Later in the case (In re Estate of Sanford) we said, page 838 of 188 Iowa, page 508 of 175 N. W.: “If, on the other hand, such absolute, imperative necessity existed, then the intention of the testator to work an equitable conversion of the real estate will be implied.” (Citing our former holdings and the general rule from other states.) A more recent case discussing the general provisions of the doctrine of equitabl | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Grady v. Grady
neutral
2 sentences1940The question of conversion is one of intention, and the question is, Is it the testator’s intent to have his real estate converted into personalty immediately upon his death?” ’ ” Later in the case (In re Estate of Sanford) we said, page 838 of 188 Iowa, page 508 of 175 N. W.: “If, on the other hand, such absolute, imperative necessity existed, then the intention of the testator to work an equitable conversion of the real estate will be implied.” (Citing our former holdings and the general rule from other states.) A more recent case discussing the general provisions of the doctrine of equitabl 1940The question of conversion is one of intention, and the question is, Is it the testator’s intent to have his real estate converted into personalty immediately upon his death?” ’ ” Later in the case (In re Estate of Sanford) we said, page 838 of 188 Iowa, page 508 of 175 N. W.: “If, on the other hand, such absolute, imperative necessity existed, then the intention of the testator to work an equitable conversion of the real estate will be implied.” (Citing our former holdings and the general rule from other states.) A more recent case discussing the general provisions of the doctrine of equitabl | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Haas v. Holman
neutral
2 sentences1939The language of the Oregon court (In re Leonard’s Estate, *1265 143 Or. 141 , 21 P. 2d 795 -799) on this proposition accurately states our views. 1939The language of the Oregon court (In re Leonard’s Estate, *1265 143 Or. 141 , 21 P. 2d 795 -799) on this proposition accurately states our views. | 1 | 1939–1939 |
Shillinglaw v. Peterson
green
2 sentences1936But it was the conclusion of the court that “It was quite generally held that there need be no devise in terms to testator’s executors, or to trustees in order that the doctrine of equitable conversion may apply. [Citing cases.] And the fact that the sale is postponed to a time subsequent to the death of the testator is not controlling. ” The rule stated in the Beaver case is cited in Shillinglaw v. Peterson, 184 Iowa 276 , 167 N. W. 709 . 1936But it was the conclusion of the court that “It was quite generally held that there need be no devise in terms to testator’s executors, or to trustees in order that the doctrine of equitable conversion may apply. [Citing cases.] And the fact that the sale is postponed to a time subsequent to the death of the testator is not controlling. ” The rule stated in the Beaver case is cited in Shillinglaw v. Peterson, 184 Iowa 276 , 167 N. W. 709 . | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Wilkerson v. Long
green
1 sentence1936In In re Mount’s Est., 189 Iowa 279, 283 , 178 N. W. 391 , 393, it is said : “An imperative and absolute direction in a will that land be sold, and the proceeds thereof distributed, works an equitable conversion of the land into personalty, as of the date of the death of the testator. | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Findley v. Findley
green
2 sentences1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . 1934Thus, the proposition to be decided in nowise involves the doctrine of equitable conversion, as a careful examination of the’ following cases will disclose: Bolton v. Myers, 146 N. Y. 257 , 40 N. E. 737 ; Hottal v. Ekart, 86 S. C. 341, 68 S. E. 576 ; Findley v. Findley, 42 W. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Buschbaum v. Hale, Exr.
neutral
1 sentence1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Hottal v. Ekart
neutral
1 sentence1934Thus, the proposition to be decided in nowise involves the doctrine of equitable conversion, as a careful examination of the’ following cases will disclose: Bolton v. Myers, 146 N. Y. 257 , 40 N. E. 737 ; Hottal v. Ekart, 86 S. C. 341, 68 S. E. 576 ; Findley v. Findley, 42 W. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Appeal of Wentz
green
2 sentences1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . 1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Yerkes v. Yerkes
neutral
2 sentences1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . 1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
In Re the Accounting of the Executors of Bolton
neutral
2 sentences1934Thus, the proposition to be decided in nowise involves the doctrine of equitable conversion, as a careful examination of the’ following cases will disclose: Bolton v. Myers, 146 N. Y. 257 , 40 N. E. 737 ; Hottal v. Ekart, 86 S. C. 341, 68 S. E. 576 ; Findley v. Findley, 42 W. 1934Thus, the proposition to be decided in nowise involves the doctrine of equitable conversion, as a careful examination of the’ following cases will disclose: Bolton v. Myers, 146 N. Y. 257 , 40 N. E. 737 ; Hottal v. Ekart, 86 S. C. 341, 68 S. E. 576 ; Findley v. Findley, 42 W. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Clifton v. Owens
green
2 sentences1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . 1934Va. 372 , 26 S. E. 433 ; Clifton v. Owens, 170 N. C. 607 , 87 S. E. 502 ; Yerkes v. Yerkes, 200 Pa. 419 , 50 A. 186 ; Buschbaum v. Hale (Ind. App.) 182 N. E. 93 ; Appeal of Wentz, 126 Pa. 541 , 17 A. 875 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Norris v. Loyd
green
1 sentence1921Norris v. Loyd, 183 Iowa 1056 . | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Dodge v. Williams
green
1 sentence1912See, as supporting this view, Gould v. Asylum, 46 Wis. 106 ( 50 N. W. 422 ); Dodge v. Williams, 46 Wis. 70 ( 1 N. W. 92 , 50 N. W. 1103 ). | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Ebey v. Adams
green
1 sentence1908Ebey v. Adams, 135 Ill. 80 ( 25 N. E. 1013 , 10 L. | 1 | 1908–1908 |
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.