# Good v. Iowa Civil Rights Commission

> Supreme Court of Iowa · May 22, 1985 · 368 N.W.2d 151

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9527801

## Case

- **Full name:** Margaret Rayburn GOOD, Formerly Known as Margaret Rayburn, Appellant, v. IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION, Appellee, Clayton Christensen, District Governor 597 and Regional Office of Rotary International, Intervenors/Appellees
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Iowa
- **Decided:** May 22, 1985
- **Citations:** 368 N.W.2d 151; 1985 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1036
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by McCORMICK
- **Judges:** Larson, Carter, McCormick, Reynoldson, Uhlenhopp, Harris, Schultz
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9527801

## Opinion text

McCORMICK, Justice
(dissenting).
Any doubt concerning the General Assembly’s intent in defining public accommodation was removed by the 1984 amendment to Iowa Code section 601A.2(10). See 1984 Iowa Acts ch. 1096, § 1. The amendment makes the statute applicable when the accommodation is extended to “nonmembers of the organization or association An amendment may indicate an intent to change the meaning of a statute or to clarify the meaning. Barnett v. Durant Community School District, 249 N.W.2d 626, 629 (Iowa 1977). One well recognized indication of legislative intent to clarify the statute is doubt or ambiguity concerning its meaning. When the amendment occurs in the midst of controversy about the proper construction of the statute, the amendment is entitled to great weight in ascertaining the intended meaning of the prior law. Id.
That situation exists here. I believe the amendment was enacted in response to the present controversy. Because the amendment resolves the doubtful meaning in favor of the construction of the statute advocated by petitioner, I would reverse the district court and remand the case to the commission for further proceedings.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9527801. Public record. Not legal advice.