# Taneia Galloway Vs. State Of Iowa

> Supreme Court of Iowa · November 5, 2010 · 790 N.W.2d 252

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9880443

## Case

- **Full name:** Taneia GALLOWAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Iowa, Appellee
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Iowa
- **Decided:** November 5, 2010
- **Citations:** 790 N.W.2d 252; 2010 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 109
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Cady
- **Judges:** Hecht, Cady, Ternus
- **Cited by:** 28 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/9880443

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- 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 jurisdict…
- 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”

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9880443. Public record. Not legal advice.