From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mayhugh v. Dea

Court of Appeals of Iowa.
Sep 23, 2015
871 N.W.2d 705 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015)

Summary

finding the acquiescence claim should be reviewed for correction of errors at law even though case had an equity designation and the parties asserted our review was de novo

Summary of this case from Albert v. Conger

Opinion

No. 15–0142.

09-23-2015

Sabre MAYHUGH, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Esther M. DEA, in her Capacity as Trustee of Richard W. Dea Revocable Trust, Esther M. Dea, in her capacity as Trustee of Esther M. Dea Trust, Thomas Pattee and Kathleen Pattee, husband and wife, and Esther M. Dea, in her individual Capacity, Defendants–Appellees.

Patrick B. Griffin of Kutak Rock, LLP, Omaha, Nebraska, for appellant. Robert M. Livingston and Kristopher K. Madsen of Stuart Tinley Law Firm, LLP, Council Bluffs, and Matthew J. Hudson of Hall Hudson, P.C., Harlan, for appellees.


DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Mayhugh v. Dea

Court of Appeals of Iowa.
Sep 23, 2015
871 N.W.2d 705 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015)

finding the acquiescence claim should be reviewed for correction of errors at law even though case had an equity designation and the parties asserted our review was de novo

Summary of this case from Albert v. Conger
Case details for

Mayhugh v. Dea

Case Details

Full title:Sabre MAYHUGH, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Esther M. DEA, in her Capacity as…

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa.

Date published: Sep 23, 2015

Citations

871 N.W.2d 705 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015)

Citing Cases

Albert v. Conger

” (citations omitted)); Dillon v. Chicago & Nw. Ry. Co. , 255 Iowa 878, 124 N.W.2d 543, 544 (1963) (“Under…