Any person affected by an order or decision of the fence viewers may appeal to the district
court by filing with the clerk of said court a notice of appeal within twenty days after the
rendition of the order or decision appealed from and filing an appeal bond in an amount
approved by the township clerk. The township clerk, after recording the original papers,
shall thereupon file them in the office of the clerk of the district court, certifying them to be
such, and the clerk shall docket them, entitling the applicant or petitioner as plaintiff, and it
shall stand for trial as other cases.
[C97, §2369; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §1851; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §113.23]
C93, §359A.23
Referred to in §602.8102(27)
Presumption of approval of bond, §636.10
\n
Notes of Decisions
Longfellow v. Sayler, 737 N.W.2d 148 (Iowa 2007).
· cites it 3× “See Iowa Code § 359A.23; Laughlin, 247 Iowa at 347 , 73 N.”
Duncalf v. Ritscher Farms, Inc., 627 N.W.2d 906 (Iowa 2001).
· cites it 4× “See Iowa Code § 359A.23 (right of appeal). Because the district court, in affirming the fence viewers, incorrectly applied the law, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
Jerry D. Longfellow Vs. Hal Sayler (Iowa 2007).
· cites it 5× “The district court decided in favor of Sayler finding the fence viewers’ determination that the Sayler fence was lawful and tight satisfied any obligation Sayler had regarding his portion of the fence under the agreement.”
Matthew Jay Hopkins v. John Robert Dickey (Iowa Ct. App. 2017).
“The trustees ordered Hopkins to “erect and maintain the East 300 feet of the partition fence” and that such be a “lawful fence” having “five barb wires attached to posts not more than 10 feet apart.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.