holding that parentally executed release, in favor of the state of Iowa, waiving minor child’s personal injury claims as a condition of child’s participation in educational field trip, violates public policy and is unenforceable
How later courts described this case
- holding that parentally executed release, in favor of the state of Iowa, waiving minor child’s personal injury claims as a condition of child’s participation in educational field trip, violates public policy and is unenforceable
- finding unenforceable a release concerning educational field trip sponsored by public university and noting “[w]e find no reason to believe opportunities for recreational, cultural, and educational activities for youths have been significantly compromised in the many jurisdictions [imposing liability]”
- stating that unless the public policy is clear and apparent, “public policy is best left to our legislative branch of government to decide as representatives of the people”
- listing cases and concluding that “the majority of state courts who have examined the issue ... have concluded public policy precludes enforcement of a parent’s preinjury waiver of her child’s cause of action for injuries caused by negligence”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CADY, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
Courts are, at times, capable of deciding legal issues based on public policy. These times, however, occur when the public policy is clear and apparent. See Fitzgerald v. Salsbury Chem., Inc., 613 N.W.2d 275, 283 (Iowa 2000) (“The need for clarity in public policy is ... recognized in our reluctance to search too far beyond our legislative pronouncements and constitution to find public policy to support an action.”). Otherwise, public policy is best left to our legislative branch of government to decide as representatives of the people. The question whether it is imprudent as a matter of law for a parent to waive legal liability on behalf of a child as a condition for the child’s participation in an educational field trip is a matter for the legislature, not judges. If the subject of parental field trip waivers has surfaced in this state as a matter of public concern, the legislature can properly examine the issue and take any appropriate action.
I would affirm the decision of the district court.
TERNUS, C.J., joins this dissent.