Uhl v. City of Sioux City
Iowa Court of Appeals
490 N.W.2d 69 (1992)
- Written by Jayme Weber, JD
Facts
Clarence and Herthel Uhl (plaintiffs) owned a farm outside Sioux City, Iowa. The Iowa State Highway Commission (State) decided to connect two highways by building a bypass across the Uhls’ property. The State entered an agreement with the City of Sioux City (City) (defendant) regarding the City’s obligations arising out of the new highway bypass. The City-State agreement said that the City would build a road running under the new bypass along the highways. The State condemned the portion of the Uhls’ property that would be used for the bypass, noting that the Uhls would be able to access their property from “the proposed city street.” The Uhls fought the State over how much money they should receive for the land, and ultimately entered a settlement agreement with the State. However, the City never built the local road, and the Uhls eventually sued the City. The Uhls argued that they were third-party beneficiaries of the City-State agreement and, therefore, had a right to enforce the term requiring the City to build the road. The trial court found that the City-State agreement was not intended to benefit the Uhls and ruled for the City. The Uhls appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Habhab, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.