operation rule in Iowa

46 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1864–2018 0 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.

Followed or applied (8)

Case	Followed	Cited
Miller v. Bonargreen iowa · 1983 · cited in 3 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1987–1990 2 sentences 1990Miller, 337 N.W.2d at 526 . 1990See id.	3	3
Brown v. Iowa District Court for Polk Countygreen iowa · 1978 · cited in 3 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1980–1987 2 sentences 1987We stated in Brown v. Iowa District Court, 272 N.W.2d 457, 458 (Iowa 1978). [w]hen a case is continued, it is not removed from the operation of the rule except that the date of trial is changed.... 1987We stated in Brown v. Iowa District Court, 272 N.W.2d 457, 458 (Iowa 1978). [w]hen a case is continued, it is not removed from the operation of the rule except that the date of trial is changed....	3	3
Talbot v. Talbotgreen iowa · 1963 · cited in 3 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1964–2000 2 sentences 2000The court has previously stated, rule 215.1 is “positive and definite and ... clearly mandatory.... ‘The operation of the rule is not discretionary with the trial court.’ ” Talbot v. Talbot, 255 Iowa 337, 340 , 122 N.W.2d 456, 458 (1963) (quoting Windus v. Great Plains Gas, 254 Iowa 114, 123 , 116 N.W.2d 410, 415 (1962)). 2000The court has previously stated, rule 215.1 is “positive and definite and ... clearly mandatory.... ‘The operation of the rule is not discretionary with the trial court.’ ” Talbot v. Talbot, 255 Iowa 337, 340 , 122 N.W.2d 456, 458 (1963) (quoting Windus v. Great Plains Gas, 254 Iowa 114, 123 , 116 N.W.2d 410, 415 (1962)).	2	3
People v. Irelandgreen cal · 1969 · cited in 2 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 2 sentences 2018We cited, among other things, a California case where the court had declared that refusing to recognize merger would extend the operation of the rule "beyond any rational function that it is designed to serve." Id. at 556 (quoting People v. Ireland , 70 Cal.2d 522 , 75 Cal.Rptr. 188 , 450 P.2d 580 , 590 (1969) (en banc)). 2018We cited, among other things, a California case where the court had declared that refusing to recognize merger would extend the operation of the rule "beyond any rational function that it is designed to serve." Id. at 556 (quoting People v. Ireland , 70 Cal.2d 522 , 75 Cal.Rptr. 188 , 450 P.2d 580 , 590 (1969) (en banc)).	2	2
Windus v. Great Plains Gasgreen iowa · 1962 · cited in 3 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1963–2000 2 sentences 2000The court has previously stated, rule 215.1 is “positive and definite and ... clearly mandatory.... ‘The operation of the rule is not discretionary with the trial court.’ ” Talbot v. Talbot, 255 Iowa 337, 340 , 122 N.W.2d 456, 458 (1963) (quoting Windus v. Great Plains Gas, 254 Iowa 114, 123 , 116 N.W.2d 410, 415 (1962)). 2000The court has previously stated, rule 215.1 is “positive and definite and ... clearly mandatory.... ‘The operation of the rule is not discretionary with the trial court.’ ” Talbot v. Talbot, 255 Iowa 337, 340 , 122 N.W.2d 456, 458 (1963) (quoting Windus v. Great Plains Gas, 254 Iowa 114, 123 , 116 N.W.2d 410, 415 (1962)).	1	3
C. C.T. S. Bk. v. M., B. S.R. Co.green iowa · 1926 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004 2 sentences 2004Bank v. Muscatine, Burlington & S. R.R., 202 Iowa 579, 584 , 210 N.W. 787, 789 (1926) ("But if he calls upon a court of chancery to put forth its extraordinary powers and grant him purely equitable relief, he may with propriety be required to submit to the operation of a rule which always applies in such cases, and do equity in order to get equity." (Citation omitted.)). 2004Bank v. Muscatine, Burlington & S. R.R., 202 Iowa 579, 584 , 210 N.W. 787, 789 (1926) ("But if he calls upon a court of chancery to put forth its extraordinary powers and grant him purely equitable relief, he may with propriety be required to submit to the operation of a rule which always applies in such cases, and do equity in order to get equity." (Citation omitted.)).	1	1
Kutrules v. Suchomelgreen iowa · 1966 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985As authority for this contention, SCI relies, in part, on the following language in Kutrules v. Suchomel, 258 Iowa 1206, 1211 , 141 N.W.2d 593, 597 (1966): The operation of the rule is set in motion by the clerk’s notice relative to cases more than one year old on July 15. 1985As authority for this contention, SCI relies, in part, on the following language in Kutrules v. Suchomel, 258 Iowa 1206, 1211 , 141 N.W.2d 593, 597 (1966): The operation of the rule is set in motion by the clerk’s notice relative to cases more than one year old on July 15.	1	1
Ross v. Cuthbertgreen or · 1964 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 1974–1974 2 sentences 1974See as illustrative Ross v. Cuthbert, 239 Or. 429, 435 , 397 P.2d 529, 531 ("It may be that the operation of the rule of contributory negligence which gives the victor all or nothing is a weakness in the textbook writers' logic. 1974See as illustrative Ross v. Cuthbert, 239 Or. 429, 435 , 397 P.2d 529, 531 ("It may be that the operation of the rule of contributory negligence which gives the victor all or nothing is a weakness in the textbook writers' logic.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (58)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Heemstra green iowa · 2006 2 sentences 2018We cited, among other things, a California case where the court had declared that refusing to recognize merger would extend the operation of the rule “beyond any rational function that it is designed to serve.” Id. at 556 (quoting People v. Ireland, 450 P.2d 580, 590 (Cal. 1969) (en banc)). 2018We cited, among other things, a California case where the court had declared that refusing to recognize merger would extend the operation of the rule "beyond any rational function that it is designed to serve." Id. at 556 (quoting People v. Ireland , 70 Cal.2d 522 , 75 Cal.Rptr. 188 , 450 P.2d 580 , 590 (1969) (en banc)).	2	2018–2018
Lucas v. Hart green iowa · 1857 2 sentences 1907Ignorance of the law will not protect a party from the operation of the rule (Lucas v. Hart, 5 Iowa, 415 ), and, where neglect and abandonment are shown with equitable circumstances in favor of the de fendant from which laches may be. imputed to the plaintiff the burden rests upon him to execute such laches. 1864Or, as the doctrine is clearly stated by Wright, J., in the case of Lucas v. Hart, 5 Iowa, 415 : “ The estoppel is allowed to prevent fraud and injustice, and exists wherever a party cannot, in good conscience, gainsay his own acts or assertions ; and it makes no difference in the operation of the rule whether the thing admitted is true or false, it being the fact that it has been acted on that makes it conclusive.” In the case of the Welland Canal Company v. Hathaway, 8 Wend., 483 , the Court say: “as a general rule a party will be concluded from denying his own acts or admissions, which were	2	1864–1907
Daniel Lado v. State of Iowa green iowa · 2011 1 sentence 2018Id.	1	2018–2018
City of Okoboji v. Iowa District Court for Dickinson County green iowa · 2008 1 sentence 2013City of Okoboji II, 744 N.W.2d at 329-30 .	1	2013–2013
Boughton v. McAllister green iowa · 1998 1 sentence 2005Boughton, 576 N.W.2d at 95 .	1	2005–2005
Charles L.M., Susan R.M. By Her Next Friend, Charles L.M. v. Northeast Independent School District green ca5 · 1989 1 sentence 2005We also adopted the rule followed in Charles L.M. v. Northeast Independent School District, 884 F.2d 869 (5th Cir.1989), to help explain the operation of our rule.	1	2005–2005
Sanchez v. Kilts green iowactapp · 1990 1 sentence 1993Id.	1	1993–1993
Ottumwa Production Credit Ass'n v. Keoco Auction Co. green iowa · 1984 1 sentence 1986Id. at 396-97 .	1	1986–1986
Handeland v. Brown green iowa · 1974 2 sentences 1980Our conclusion there is equally applicable here: “[W]e do not believe any proper basis exists for excluding from the operation of that principle only situations where concurrent proximate negligence of the injured person is pleaded as a defense to the claim of one who holds a legally protected interest in the health or life of such injured person.” 216 N.W.2d at 578 . 1980Our conclusion there is equally applicable here: "[W]e do not believe any proper basis exists for excluding from the operation of that principle only situations where concurrent proximate negligence of the injured person is pleaded as a defense to the claim of one who holds a legally protected interest in the health or life of such injured person." 216 N.W.2d at 578 .	1	1980–1980
In Re State of Schroeder green · 1940 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
In Re Estate of Everett green · 1947 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
Wehrman v. Farmers & Merchants Savings Bank green iowa · 1935 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
In Re Estate of Warren green iowa · 1931 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
In Re Estate of Davis green iowa · 1927 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
In Re Miller's Estate. green iowa · 1952 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
Beem v. Beem green iowa · 1950 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
Tennant v. Smith neutral iowa · 1915 1 sentence 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
Herring v. Herring green iowa · 1919 1 sentence 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
In re Will of Watenpaugh green · 1922 1 sentence 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
In re Estate of Coleman green iowa · 1951 2 sentences 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in 1979The principal cases involving the doctrine in the antilapse statute setting are Tennant v. Smith, 173 Iowa 264 , 155 N.W. 267 (inter-spousal devise; doctrine applied); Herring v. Herring, 187 Iowa 593 , 174 N.W. 364 (similar); In re Will of Watenpaugh, 192 Iowa 1178 , 186 N.W. 198 (devise and inheritance found not identical; doctrine not applied); In re Estate of Davis, 204 Iowa 1231 , 213 N.W. 395 (same); In re Estate of Warren, 211 Iowa 940 , 234 N.W. 835 (facts similar to present case; doctrine applied); Wehrman v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Savings Bank, 221 Iowa 249 , 259 N.W. 564 (will and in	1	1979–1979
Rath v. Sholty green iowa · 1972 1 sentence 1974The operation of the rule 215.1 amendment in a mandatory reinstatement situation and the scope of review in this court are set out in Rath v. Sholty, 199 N.W.2d at 336 : “* * * [Tjrial court must initially determine whether the evidence adduced at the hearing constitutes a ‘showing’ of oversight, mistake or other reasonable cause.	1	1974–1974
McNally v. Addis green nyappdiv · 1970 2 sentences 1974Evidently the courts view with disfavor a contention that a third party should pay all of the damages when the husband's own negligence was responsible for some of them."); Emery v. Frateschi, 161 Me. 281 , 211 A.2d 578 (son and the third person both on wrong sides of road); McNally v. Addis, 65 Misc.2d 204 , 317 N.Y.S.2d 157 (son intoxicated). 1974Evidently the courts view with disfavor a contention that a third party should pay all of the damages when the husband's own negligence was responsible for some of them."); Emery v. Frateschi, 161 Me. 281 , 211 A.2d 578 (son and the third person both on wrong sides of road); McNally v. Addis, 65 Misc.2d 204 , 317 N.Y.S.2d 157 (son intoxicated).	1	1974–1974
Emery v. Frateschi green me · 1965	1	1974–1974
Baty v. City of West Des Moines green iowa · 1966	1	1968–1968
Seela v. Haye green iowa · 1964	1	1968–1968
Windus v. Great Plains Gas green iowa · 1963	1	1964–1964
In Re Estate of Hill green iowa · 1941	1	1955–1955
Mitchell v. Vest green iowa · 1912	1	1941–1941
General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Whiteley neutral iowa · 1934	1	1939–1939
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Anderson neutral iowa · 1920	1	1939–1939
State v. Price neutral iowa · 1905	1	1928–1928
Gronvold v. Federal Union Surety Co. neutral ca8 · 1914	1	1927–1927
Long v. Hewitt green iowa · 1876	1	1926–1926
Chehak v. Battles green iowa · 1907	1	1926–1926
Bissell v. Lewis green · 1881	1	1924–1924
Marin Water & Power Co. v. Town of Sausalito green calctapp · 1920	1	1922–1922
Wilson v. Wapello County green iowa · 1905	1	1922–1922
Snethen v. Harrison County green iowa · 1915	1	1922–1922
Drake v. Brickner neutral iowa · 1917	1	1919–1919
Wescott v. Binford green iowa · 1898	1	1914–1914

Where else courts name it

CA 154 (1857–2025) NY 132 (1823–2024) PA 89 (1834–2020) IL 86 (1864–2023) TX 84 (1860–2024) AL 77 (1846–2018) NC 59 (1855–2025) CT 57 (1874–2022) FL 52 (1924–2021) MD 50 (1873–2023) MO 46 (1879–2003) IA 46 (1864–2018) IN 39 (1833–2020) NJ 37 (1903–2002) WA 37 (1890–2017) NE 37 (1883–2017) MA 31 (1894–2014) CO 29 (1890–2020) OK 26 (1896–2012) NM 24 (1924–2010) KS 23 (1888–2013) OR 23 (1900–2017) OH 22 (1907–2019) GA 21 (1909–2020) VA 21 (1874–2023) KY 20 (1883–1997) MI 19 (1851–2025) AR 18 (1915–2003) WV 16 (1907–2016) MN 16 (1877–2019) AZ 16 (1934–2008) WI 14 (1894–2020) MS 14 (1875–2014) WY 13 (1899–2019) TN 13 (1906–2014) LA 11 (1860–2010) UT 10 (1987–2024) DC 10 (1914–2019) DE 8 (1880–2016) MT 7 (1923–1999) RI 6 (1873–2004) ID 6 (1918–1997) SD 5 (1897–2022) ND 5 (1976–1996) NH 5 (1853–1994) AK 5 (1967–1983) NV 5 (1867–1936) SC 4 (1879–1969) ME 4 (1897–1983) HI 4 (1958–1987)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check