Summary
determining a motion for JNOV "was not presented with enough specificity for us to review the issue on appeal"
Summary of this case from Troendle v. Troendle (In re Estate of Troendle)Opinion
No. 19-0739
05-13-2020
Alexander SHCHARANSKY and Tatiana Shcharansky, Petitioners-Appellees/Cross-Appellants, v. Vadim SHAPIRO, Boris Pusin, Ilya Markevich, Alex Komm and Dmitry Khots, Respondents-Appellants/Cross-Appellees. Vadim Shapiro, Boris Pusin, Ilya Markevich, Alex Komm and Dmitry Khots, Cross-Petition Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Boris Shcharansky, Zoya Staroselsky, Leonid Shcharansky, and Slava Staroselsky, Cross-Petition Defendants/Appellees. Vadim Shapiro, Boris Pusin, Ilya Markevich, Alex Komm and Dmitry Khots, Third-Party Petition Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Continuous Control Solutions, LLC, Third-Party Defendant/Appellee.
Jaki K. Samuelson and Anna E. Mallen of Whitfield & Eddy, P.L.C., Des Moines, for appellants. Mark E. Weinhardt and Danielle M. Shelton of The Weinhardt Law Firm, Des Moines, for appellees.
DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION See Iowa R. App. P. 6.904
The cross-petition plaintiffs and third-party petition plaintiffs appeal from jury verdicts finding against their claims for breach of contract and reimbursement. As respondents, they also challenge the scope of the trial as to the contribution claim against them, arguing they should have been allowed to present affirmative defenses. The petitioners cross-appeal, challenging the district court's ruling they were not entitled to prejudgment interest on their contribution claim. AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS ON CROSS-APPEAL.