Supreme Court of Iowa, 1897

Wallick v. Pierce

Wallick v. Pierce
Supreme Court of Iowa · Decided May 22, 1897 · Deemer
102 Iowa 746; 71 N.W. 429

Wallick v. Pierce

Opinion of the Court

Deemer, J.

This is an equity cause, triable here de novo if at all, and the abstract must show that we have all the evidence offered, received, or introduced. A statement that it contains all the evidence introduced and received is not sufficient, for we must have all the evidence offered, whether received or rejected by the lower court. Reed v. Larrison, 77 Iowa, 399; Taylor v. Kier, 54 Iowa, 645; Tuttle v. Story County, 56 Iowa, 316; Marble Works v. Linesenmeyer, 80 Iowa, 253; Bank v. Ash, 85 Iowa, 74. The statement made by appellant with reference to this matter is that β€œthe abstract is a full, true, and complete one of all the evidence offered and received, as well as introduced and received.” The evidence offered and rejected is not set out. We cannot try the case de novo and, as no errors are assigned, there is nothing to consider. Reed v. Larrison, supra. For the reasons first above stated, the judgment is aeeirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.