5 Iowa opinions name it 1 courts 1939–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
City of Springfield v. Commissioner of Revenuegreen1 sentence2002See South Iowa Methodist Homes, Inc., 173 N.W.2d at 533 (“[i]n each case there is some distinguishing feature or statute” which commands us to decide each case on its own unique facts); see also City of Springfield, 380 N.W.2d at 805 (exemption denied but circumstances of case presented extremely close decision); Greater Anchorage Area Borough v. Sisters of Charity, 553 P.2d 467 , 471 n. 12 (Alaska 1976) (case did not raise question whether exemption was necessary to secure services of doctors for the hospital to function). | 1 | 1 |
South Iowa Methodist Homes, Inc. v. Board of Reviewgreen1 sentence2002See South Iowa Methodist Homes, Inc., 173 N.W.2d at 533 (“[i]n each case there is some distinguishing feature or statute” which commands us to decide each case on its own unique facts); see also City of Springfield, 380 N.W.2d at 805 (exemption denied but circumstances of case presented extremely close decision); Greater Anchorage Area Borough v. Sisters of Charity, 553 P.2d 467 , 471 n. 12 (Alaska 1976) (case did not raise question whether exemption was necessary to secure services of doctors for the hospital to function). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State of Iowa v. Dale Dean Pettijohn Jr.
green
2 sentences2021Id. 2021Id. | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Trevett v. Prison Ass'n
green
2 sentences1939(N.S.) 1025, after an extensive review of the authorities, in affirming a judgment for the plaintiff, who, merely as a friend, accompanied a patient to the hospital, and was injured in an unprotected elevator shaft, said: "Applying the principles considered to the case before us, it becomes at once apparent that the defendant in error was not a beneficiary of the charity, but that she is to be considered as a stranger, and comes within the influence of the principle that a charitable corporation is not exempt from liability for torts *Page 399 against strangers because it holds its property in 1939(N.S.) 1025, after an extensive review of the authorities, in affirming a judgment for the plaintiff, who, merely as a friend, accompanied a patient to the hospital, and was injured in an unprotected elevator shaft, said: "Applying the principles considered to the case before us, it becomes at once apparent that the defendant in error was not a beneficiary of the charity, but that she is to be considered as a stranger, and comes within the influence of the principle that a charitable corporation is not exempt from liability for torts *Page 399 against strangers because it holds its property in | 2 | 1939–1939 |
Greater Anchorage Area Borough v. Sisters of Charity of the House of Providence
green
1 sentence2002See South Iowa Methodist Homes, Inc., 173 N.W.2d at 533 (“[i]n each case there is some distinguishing feature or statute” which commands us to decide each case on its own unique facts); see also City of Springfield, 380 N.W.2d at 805 (exemption denied but circumstances of case presented extremely close decision); Greater Anchorage Area Borough v. Sisters of Charity, 553 P.2d 467 , 471 n. 12 (Alaska 1976) (case did not raise question whether exemption was necessary to secure services of doctors for the hospital to function). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.