10 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1927–2026 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Vachon v. Stategreen2 sentences2024Co. v. Meister, 713 N.W.2d 225, 231 (Iowa 2006) (“Though the Meisters may have questioned their collective memory and not realized they possessed evidence to establish [the] fraud, they certainly had 8 enough information . . . to alert them of the need to investigate.”); Vachon v. State, 514 N.W.2d 442, 446 (Iowa 1994) (noting a claimant may have inquiry notice without knowing “the details of the evidence by which to prove the cause of action”). 2020Co., 713 N.W.2d at 231 (“A claimant can be on inquiry notice without knowing ‘the details of the evidence by which to prove the cause of action.’ ” (quoting Vachon v. State, 514 N.W.2d 442, 446 (Iowa 1994))). | 6 | 6 |
Hallett Construction Co. v. Meistergreen2 sentences2024Co. v. Meister, 713 N.W.2d 225, 231 (Iowa 2006) (“Though the Meisters may have questioned their collective memory and not realized they possessed evidence to establish [the] fraud, they certainly had 8 enough information . . . to alert them of the need to investigate.”); Vachon v. State, 514 N.W.2d 442, 446 (Iowa 1994) (noting a claimant may have inquiry notice without knowing “the details of the evidence by which to prove the cause of action”). 2020Co., 713 N.W.2d at 231 (“A claimant can be on inquiry notice without knowing ‘the details of the evidence by which to prove the cause of action.’ ” (quoting Vachon v. State, 514 N.W.2d 442, 446 (Iowa 1994))). | 3 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stilson v. First State Bank
neutral
2 sentences1933Div. 696, quoted in Nonotuck Silk Co. v. Flanders, 87 Wis. 237 , 58 N. W. 383 .” In the case of Stilson v. First State Bank, 152 Iowa 724 , loc. cit. 730, 133 N. W. 354 , 356, we said: “Claimant’s claim of preference does not present a controversy with the bank but with the other creditors of the bank. 1927Bank, 152 Iowa 724 , 730: "Claimant's claim of preference does not present a controversy with the bank, but with the other creditors of the bank. | 2 | 1927–1933 |
Jacques v. Farmers Lumber & Supply Co.
green
2 sentences1969Co., supra, 242 Iowa 548 , 47 N.W.2d 236 , which we think is not in point, in support of it. 1969Co., supra, 242 Iowa 548 , 47 N.W.2d 236 , which we think is not in point, in support of it. | 1 | 1969–1969 |
Miller v. Illinois Central Railroad
neutral
2 sentences1964“This is the settled law in this state; it has been reiterated about every time the subject has been talked about by the courts.” Miller v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 223 Iowa 316, 319 , 272 N.W. 96 . 1964“This is the settled law in this state; it has been reiterated about every time the subject has been talked about by the courts.” Miller v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 223 Iowa 316, 319 , 272 N.W. 96 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
Nonotuck Silk Co. v. Flanders
green
2 sentences1933Div. 696, quoted in Nonotuck Silk Co. v. Flanders, 87 Wis. 237 , 58 N. W. 383 .” In the case of Stilson v. First State Bank, 152 Iowa 724 , loc. cit. 730, 133 N. W. 354 , 356, we said: “Claimant’s claim of preference does not present a controversy with the bank but with the other creditors of the bank. 1933Div. 696, quoted in Nonotuck Silk Co. v. Flanders, 87 Wis. 237 , 58 N. W. 383 .” In the case of Stilson v. First State Bank, 152 Iowa 724 , loc. cit. 730, 133 N. W. 354 , 356, we said: “Claimant’s claim of preference does not present a controversy with the bank but with the other creditors of the bank. | 1 | 1933–1933 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.