Case Name: The Des Moines Navigation and Railroad Company v. Doran
Court: Iowa Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Iowa
Decision Date: 1857
Citations: 4 Iowa 553
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Des Moines Navigation and Railroad Company v. Doran.
Judges: 
Reporter: Iowa Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 553–554

Head Matter:
The Des Moines Navigation and Railroad Company v. Doran.
An original notice in an action of trespass quwre clammn fregii, as follows : “ To G. D.: Sir — You are hereby notified that there is now on file in the office of the clerk of the District Court of Boone county, state of Iowa, a petition of the Des Moines Navigation and Eailroad Company, claiming of you the sum of five hundred dollars, as money due for your trespasses upon, and injuries done, certain parcels of real estate of said petitioner; and that unless you appear and answer thereto, on or before the morning of the second day of the next term of the District Coórt of Boone county, state of Iowa, judgment will be rendered against you thereon,” and signed by the attorneys of the plaintiff, is sufficient.
An original notice need not be as full and specific as the petition.
Appeal from the Boone District Court.
This was an action for a trespass upon certain lands, described by congressional numbers, and the trespass is laid in Boone county. The original notice was as follows:
“ To George Doran:
“ Sir — You are hereby notified that there is now on file in the office of the clerk of the District Court of Boone county, state of Iowa, a petition of the Des Moines Navigation and Railroad Company, claiming of you the sum of five hundred dollars, as money due for your trespasses upon, and injuries done, certain parcels of real estate of said petitioner, and that unless you appear and answer thereto on or before the morning of the second day of the next term of the District Court of Boone county, state of Iowa, judgment will be rendered against you thereon.
“ Holcombe & Beal, Attys. for plaintiff.”
The defendant moved to “ dissolve ” the notice, for reason, first, that it does not follow the petition; second, that it does not set forth any day on which the trespass was committed, nor the county and state; third, that it is vague and uncertain. The court sustained this motion, and dismissed the cause. This is assigned as error.
Knapp, Galdwell & Wright, for the appellant.
George Doran, pro. se.

Opinion:
Woodward, J.
The petition or declaration sets forth the particulars of the trespass, with the regularity and technicality o£ a declaration at common law, giving the day, and, laying the venue properly. The notice is sufficient. It need not be as full and specific as the petition. This one is as definite as seems to be required by the Code, Chap. 135.
The judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.