Clark Bros. v. Anderson, No. 40677.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtMORLING
Citation234 N.W. 844,211 Iowa 920
PartiesCLARK BROS. ET AL. v. ANDERSON & PERRY.
Docket NumberNo. 40677.
Decision Date10 February 1931

211 Iowa 920
234 N.W. 844

CLARK BROS. ET AL.
v.
ANDERSON & PERRY.

No. 40677.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Feb. 10, 1931.


Appeal from District Court, Monroe County; E. K. Daugherty, Judge.

Action by judgment defendants against attorneys for the judgment plaintiff for damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of defendants here having presented to the trial court in the action in which the judgment was procured a judgment entry falsely finding that defendants (plaintiffs here) executed the note there sued upon. Motion to strike the answer was overruled, and plaintiffs appeal.

Affirmed.

[234 N.W. 844]

D. N. Clark, of Albia, for appellants.

John T. Clarkson and Anderson & Perry, all of Albia, for appellees.


MORLING, J.

Defendants were the attorneys for the Iowa Title & Loan Company in a suit to recover upon promissory notes and to foreclose mortgage which came to this court under the title Iowa Title & Loan Company v. Clark Brothers, reported in 224 N. W. 774. In that suit the defendants, who are the present plaintiffs, admitted that they did execute “the two promissory notes sued upon, copies of which are attached to the petition. * * *” They there alleged as their defense that they had conveyed the mortgaged premises to Dunkin; that Dunkin had assumed the mortgage indebtedness, and that the Iowa Title & Loan Company had, without the knowledge or consent of the present plaintiffs, extended the time of payment. The (present) plaintiffs were defeated on that issue. Iowa Title & Loan Co. v. Clark Bros. (Iowa) 224 N. W. 774. Plaintiffs in their petition in this action allege that defendants were attorneys in the above-mentioned action; that they (defendants) filed a verified petition upon two alleged promissory notes (setting them out verbatim); that plaintiffs never issued any notes to the Iowa Title & Loan Company “of the terms, words, letters, figures and conditions as declared and alleged and the defendant did not, at the institution of said action, have any note or notes, contract or obligation in favor of said Iowa Title & Loan Company, in possession of the said words, terms, letters, figures and conditions as alleged.” The petition alleges that the “plaintiffs as defendants in the said case, relying and believing in the integrity and honesty of the said defendant that they issued notes of the words, terms, letters, figures and conditions, as alleged, as aforesaid, were, by the said allegations and verifications as aforesaid, deceived and thereby induced to, and did, admit the genuineness thereof” in their answer. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants presented to the judge of the court as true “a judgment entry previously prepared, okayed as to form by the defendants, in the said case and did then and there procure the signature of the Judge of this court to the said judgment entry.

[234 N.W. 845]

* * *” Plaintiffs allege that defendants at the time of procuring the judgment entry knew that the present plaintiffs “had not issued to the plaintiff any note or notes, contract or allegation (obligation?) of the words, terms, letters, figures and conditions as alleged, and that the plaintiff in said case was not entitled to said judgment and could not prove every material element of the contract alleged, and the defendant procured the signature of the Judge to said judgment entry and the okay of the plaintiffs herein thereto wilfully, maliciously and with intent to and did injure, defraud and deceive the plaintiff....

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Amos v. Prom, Civ. No. 571.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • September 30, 1953
    ...v. Cady, 1942, 232 Iowa 403, 4 N.W.2d 225; Gregory v. Sorenson, 1932, 214 Iowa 1374, 242 N.W. 91; Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 1931, 211 Iowa 920, 234 N.W. 844; Roggensack v. Winona Monument Co., 1930, 211 Iowa 1307, 233 N.W. 493; Morrow v. Scoville, 1928, 206 Iowa 1134, 221 N.W. 802; J......
  • Stockdale v. Agrico Chemical Co., Div. of Con. Oil Co., Civ. No. 69-C-2010-C.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • March 21, 1972
    ...has consistently adhered to that principle. See Syester v. Banta, 257 Iowa 613, 627, 133 N.W.2d 666; Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 211 Iowa 920, 924, 234 N.W. 844; ..." (Additional citations The Iowa cases clearly and consistently hold that exemplary damages are only permissible in cases......
  • Claude v. Weaver Const. Co., No. 52890
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 9, 1968
    ...consistently adhered to that principle. See Page 145 Syester v. Banta, 257 Iowa 613, 627, 133 N.W.2d 666; Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 211 Iowa 920, 924, 234 N.W. 844; 25 C.J.S. Damages § 118, page 1121; 22 Am.Jur.2d, Damages, section 241, page 328; and Legal Seminar, Iowa Academy of Tr......
  • Shannon v. Gaar, No. 46516.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 23, 1944
    ...cannot be recovered. Appellees cite the following decisions of this court which sustain the holding: Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 211 Iowa 920, 234 N.W. 844; [15 N.W.2d 260]Boardman v. Grocery Co., 105 Iowa 445, 75 N.W. 343;Kuhn v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 74 Iowa 137, 37 N.W. 116;......
4 cases
  • Amos v. Prom, Civ. No. 571.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • September 30, 1953
    ...v. Cady, 1942, 232 Iowa 403, 4 N.W.2d 225; Gregory v. Sorenson, 1932, 214 Iowa 1374, 242 N.W. 91; Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 1931, 211 Iowa 920, 234 N.W. 844; Roggensack v. Winona Monument Co., 1930, 211 Iowa 1307, 233 N.W. 493; Morrow v. Scoville, 1928, 206 Iowa 1134, 221 N.W. 802; J......
  • Stockdale v. Agrico Chemical Co., Div. of Con. Oil Co., Civ. No. 69-C-2010-C.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • March 21, 1972
    ...has consistently adhered to that principle. See Syester v. Banta, 257 Iowa 613, 627, 133 N.W.2d 666; Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 211 Iowa 920, 924, 234 N.W. 844; ..." (Additional citations The Iowa cases clearly and consistently hold that exemplary damages are only permissible in cases......
  • Claude v. Weaver Const. Co., No. 52890
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 9, 1968
    ...consistently adhered to that principle. See Page 145 Syester v. Banta, 257 Iowa 613, 627, 133 N.W.2d 666; Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 211 Iowa 920, 924, 234 N.W. 844; 25 C.J.S. Damages § 118, page 1121; 22 Am.Jur.2d, Damages, section 241, page 328; and Legal Seminar, Iowa Academy of Tr......
  • Shannon v. Gaar, No. 46516.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 23, 1944
    ...cannot be recovered. Appellees cite the following decisions of this court which sustain the holding: Clark Bros. v. Anderson & Perry, 211 Iowa 920, 234 N.W. 844; [15 N.W.2d 260]Boardman v. Grocery Co., 105 Iowa 445, 75 N.W. 343;Kuhn v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 74 Iowa 137, 37 N.W. 116;......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT