124 Iowa 199 | Iowa | 1904
The contentions for appellant are, first, that plaintiffs were negligent; second, that plaintiffs elected another remedy; and, third, that the jury were erroneously allowed to include damages as to one heifer which was not the property of the plaintiffs at the time the action was brought. The errors relied upon with reference to these matters are presented in different methods, and we can satisfactorily dispose of the case assuming that each of these questions was properly raised in the trial court.
Finding no error to have been committed by the trial court, we reach the conclusion that the judgment’ should be„ and it is, aeeirmed: . .