Theis v. James
| Decision Date | 11 March 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 54391,54391 |
| Parties | Don THEIS, Appellee, v. Donald R. JAMES, Appellant. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Reynoldson & Reynoldson, Osceola, for appellant.
Hoffman, Hoffman & Stewart, Leon, and Johnston & Miles, Corydon, for appellee.
This is an action at law on a check given by the defendant and payable to plaintiff. The check was dated June of 1969 for the sum of $4680. The consideration as stated on the face of the check was 78 calves of a specified age and condition. The check was returned to the plaintiff marked 'insufficient funds'. Default was entered and the court refused to set the default judgment aside. Defendant appeals. We reverse and remand.
Plaintiff filed his petition on July 31, 1968. On August 27, 1969 defendant, a resident of Illinois and an attorney licensed to practice in Iowa, filed his appearance pro se and motion for further time to move or plead. Time was extended to September 12, 1969. Various other motions and rulings consumed another three weeks. On September 30, 1969 plaintiff amended his petition to ask for a writ of attachment since defendant was a nonresident. On October 7, 1969 (last day to move or plead) Judge Thomas Bown received a telephone call from defendant in Bloomington, Illinois. The judge advised defendant that if a motion or pleading was placed in the mail the same day a default would not be entered. plaintiff's attorney was advised of this call and consented to the terms agreed on. No motion or pleading was placed in the mail by defendant on October 7, 1969. Defendant's explanation of this failure is that he felt it would take two days for the mail to get from his home in Bloomington, Illinois to the Wayne County courthouse. He planned to use the two days to determine whether to move or plead, drive to the courthouse on the third day and personally file the motion or pleading. He followed this plan. When he arrived the clerk's office was closed because the clerk was out of town. He then mailed the motion for cost bond from Corydon.
On October 14, 1969 plaintiff filed a combined motion to strike defendant's motion and for default which defendant resisted. On December 24 the court sustained the motion to strike and entered default. Judgment was entered December 26, 1969. Defendant filed moton to set aside the default asserting among other grounds that defendant had timely filed his cost bond and plaintiff was not in a position to demand a default. Defendant also asserted 'lack of consideration, fraud and mutual mistake' as defenses. Basically he claims the cattle were not as represented and issued a stop order on the check. Motion to set aside the default judgment was denied.
Defendant seeks reversal on two grounds, (1) the court abused its discretion in refusing to set aside the default and, (2) the court had no power to enter a default when there was an undisposed of motion on file. We find the latter ground to be dispositive of the appeal and do not consider the claim of abuse of discretion.
Where undisposed of motions are on file an order of the trial court finding defendant to be in default is erroneous and must be set aside. Pedersen v. Thorn, 258 Iowa 250, 253, 137 N.W.2d 588 (1965); City of Des Moines v. Barnes, 237 Iowa 6, 20 N.W.2d 895 (1945); Bombei v. Schafer, 242 Iowa 619, 626, 47 N.W.2d 842 (1951).
Plaintiff distinguishes the above cases on the grounds the decisions find a waiver of right to default by long delay before demand for default was made. We cannot agree. All of the Iowa cases we have examined have disapproved entry of default while an undisposed of motion is on file. This case is different in that the motion was disposed of before default was entered. Thus a second question is raised. Can the court dispose of an undisposed of motion and enter default without allowing the usual seven days to move or plead over?
We have recognized the trial court's discretion to strike a motion or pleading because it was filed too late. Brown v. Schmitz, 237 Iowa 418, 22 N.W.2d 340 (1946); In re Cheney's Estate, 223 Iowa 1076, 1079, 274 N.W. 5. We continue to recognize the trial court's discretion but it does not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Klinge v. Luana Sav. Bank
...We review for an abuse of discretion a court's ruling on a motion to strike a pleading because it was filed too late. Theis v. James, 184 N.W.2d 708, 710 (Iowa 1971). An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court's decision rests "'on grounds or for reasons clearly untenable or to a......
-
In re Fredericksen
...discretion has been abused.”).Our review of the district court's grant of a motion to strike is for abuse of discretion. Theis v. James, 184 N.W.2d 708, 710 (Iowa 1971). “The district court abuses its discretion when it exercises its discretion on grounds or for reasons clearly untenable or......
-
Estate of Steensma v. Buysman, Inc.
...are on file an order of the trial court finding defendant to be in default is erroneous and must be set aside." Theis v. James , 184 N.W.2d 708, 709–10 (Iowa 1971). "[T]he refusal of the court to aside the default and judgment rendered thereunder must be reversed." Pedersen v. Thorn , 137 N......
-
AAA Electric v. Agri Processors, Inc., No. 3-726/02-1623 (Iowa App. 12/10/2003)
...appeals. Scope of Review. Our review of the district court's grant of a motion to strike is for abuse of discretion. Thies v. James, 184 N.W.2d 708, 710 (Iowa 1971). Summary judgment rulings are reviewed for correction of errors at law. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; General Car & Truck Leasing Sys.,......