Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Hartig Drug Company v. Hartig

Supreme Court of Iowa
602 N.W.2d 794 (1999)


Facts

Hartig Drug Company (Hartig Drug) (plaintiff), a family business, operated retail-pharmacy stores in Iowa. After Kenneth Hartig (defendant) acquired ownership of the properties that housed the stores from his brother, he leased the buildings to Hartig Drug. The lease for one store located in Dubuque provided for a base rent of $3,208.33, which could be increased to 2.75 percent of the store’s gross sales. The percentage lease provision’s purpose was to give Hartig a stake in Hartig Drug’s success. After the lease term began, Hartig Drug contracted with the United States Postal Service to sell stamps to customers as a convenience. Hartig Drug received an annual compensation of $5,000 from 1985 through 1993, and then $9,000 from 1994 onward, on total stamp sales of more than $2.3 million. Hartig Drug also began selling lottery tickets in return for commissions from the Iowa state government. In total, Hartig Drug received $42,435.29 in commissions for total lottery sales of $634,714. In 1996, Hartig Drug filed a petition for declaratory judgment, asking a court to compel Hartig to perform maintenance and repairs at the Dubuque store. Hartig counterclaimed, alleging that Hartig Drug owed additional rent, because it had failed to account for lottery and stamp sales in its gross sales. The trial court ruled that the percentage rent should have included the sale of lottery tickets and stamps, and the court ordered Hartig Drug to pay an additional $128,075.95 in rent to Hartig. Hartig Drug appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Cady, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.