# Rowen v. LeMars Mutual Insurance Co. of Iowa

> Supreme Court of Iowa · November 14, 1984 · 357 N.W.2d 579

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9739794

## Case

- **Full name:** Marla ROWEN, Mary E. Farnsworth, for Themselves and All Other Policyholders-Members of LeMars Mutual Insurance Company of Iowa, and for Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Appellants, v. LeMARS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF IOWA, Appellee, Alice Alesch, Executor of the Estate of John Alesch, A/K/A John H. Alesch, Clyde Eastman, Alice W. Alesch, M.H. Tappan, W.K. Tappan, P.G. Vandermeer, M.H. Gearke, John M. Vollmar and Burton Dull, and the Iowa Mutual Insurance Company of DeWitt, Iowa, Raymond A. Brown, William Couch, George S. Howes, Carl J. Smith, Carman G. Smith, and Alesch, Inc., Margaret A. Sevenich, Mark Kay Buffington and Jane M. Warnock, Defendants
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Iowa
- **Decided:** November 14, 1984
- **Citations:** 357 N.W.2d 579; 1984 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1276
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Carter
- **Judges:** Reynoldson, McCormick, Larson, Schultz, Carter
- **Cited by:** 36 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/9739794

## Opinion text

CARTER, Justice
(concurring specially).
The majority appears to approve a court-imposed limitation on solicitation of proxies on the ground that it is in the best interests of the company to retain the present directors in whole or in part. I do not believe that a court of equity should condition the election of directors of a membership association in a manner which favors a particular outcome in the elective process. I do believe, however, that there are other reasons, based on promoting fairness in the election process, which justify the limitations which the district court imposed. I therefore concur in the result.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9739794. Public record. Not legal advice.