Supreme Court of Iowa, 1859

Dyson v. Ream

Supreme Court of Iowa · Decided June 15, 1859 · Stockton

9 Iowa 51

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

State of Iowa v. Kyra Rose Bauler (Iowa 2024)
German-American State Bank v. Erickson (N.D. 1919)
Overhouser v. American Cereal Co. (Iowa 1905)
Bruce v. Foley (Wash. 1897)
Tucker v. Parks (Colo. 1883)
Patterson v. Clark (Iowa 1866)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Stockton, J.

At the common law, in an action of tres-

pass to personal property, the plea of “not guilty” was proper, if the plaintiff had no property in the goods, or the defendant was not guilty of the taking. So, if he did take the goods, but they did not belong to the plaintiff, the plea of tho general issue- was proper. Stephens’ Pleading, 195; 1 Chitty’s Pleading, 538.

Under the system of pleading inaugurated by our Code, there is, strictly speaking, no general issue. The defence relied upon, must be pleaded.1 If reliance is placed on the fact, that defendant did not commit the grievances complained of, a denial of the facts alleged is sufficient. If, *53however, the defence is, that the property did not belong to the plaintiff, but belonged to the defendant, the answer must set up these facts, before the defendant can be allowed to prove them on the trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Walters v. Washington Insurance Company, 1 Iowa 404: Hutchinson v. Sangster, 4 G. Greene 340 : Bowen & King v. Hale, 4 Iowa 430 : Hagan v. Burch, 8 Ib 310.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.