Case law

Read v. Howe

39 Iowa 553 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 20, 1874

and re-examination of the entire testimony in this case, we feel constrained to hold that the fraud alleged to have been committed by the administrator, in effecting a settlement with the county court, has not been fairly established … -The evidence-quite clearly satisfies US that these pur- - • ..... ' . „ , „ chases were madem the interest and tor the benefit of C. K. Howe, the administrator.

The Waldinger Corporation, Emcasco Insurance Company, and Second Injury Fund of Iowa v. Michael B. Mettler

817 N.W.2d 1 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 6, 2012

Rejecting Ellingson’s claim for additional healing period benefits for times *8 after the date upon which the commissioner found she had reached MMI, we said: In contrast, once it has been established through a decision of … Mettler’s claim against the Second Injury Fund under Iowa Code section 85.64 alleged prior injuries to his left knee, left elbow, and right knee as qualifying prior losses.

Iowa Power and Light Co. v. Abild Construction Co.

259 Iowa 314 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 14, 1966

It cannot be said this contract was clearly intended to confer direct benefits on Ipalco. … As to the employer and employee there can be said to be a quid pro quo for immunity from tort liability.

State v. Fetters

202 N.W.2d 84 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Nov 15, 1972

Clough, 259 Iowa 1351, 1357 , 147 N.W.2d 847, 851 , a divided court indicated that the state in order to sustain its burden must establish the defendant was clearly advised of his constitutional rights. … The proof of similar transactions involving crime must be clearly shown. Mere suspicion is not enough.

University of Des Moines v. Polk County Homestead & Trust Co.

87 Iowa 36 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 18, 1893

The material question, which seems to overshadow all others in the contract, is the establishing and maintaining “a college of standard grade.” … The size and cost of the building clearly indicate that no great institution of learning was contemplated by the parties.

Kirchner v. Dorsey Dorsey

226 Iowa 283 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Feb 14, 1939

George Laughlin, a surgeon living at Kirksville, Missouri, who attempted to establish an opening in the cervical canal but was unsuccessful. He then opened the abdomen and removed the uterus.' Mrs. … Clearly, under this record, there was sufficient evidence that the negligence of the appellants was the proximate cause of appellee’s injury. III.

State v. Smith

272 N.W.2d 859 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Dec 20, 1978

This “provided a sufficient indicium of reliability to establish the prima facie admissibility of the test results.” 258 N.W.2d at 568 . … If the second requirement cannot be met, then the State must either establish a complete chain of custody from the time of acquisition of the specimen to the time it is delivered to the laboratory technician or establish

Samuel De Dios v. Indemnity Insurance Company of North America and Broadspire Services, Inc.

927 N.W.2d 611 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 10, 2019

But this area of law already has a workable bright line in our view—a line established by the legislature. … The Sanchez court reasoned that if auditors in California have immunity, then third-party administrators should have immunity. Id. at 801–02.

State v. Harris

741 N.W.2d 1 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Aug 24, 2007

Harris clearly and unequivocally requested an attorney at this point in the interrogation. … “To establish harmless error, the State must ‘prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.’ ” Id. at 431 .

Thiele v. Whittenbaugh

291 N.W.2d 324 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 23, 1980

Whether the will provisions establishing the scope of the life tenant’s interest authorized the life tenant to invade corpus of the partition sale proceeds; and 4. … The Court still is of the opinion that normal nursing home care would not qualify as sickness under decedent’s Will. However, after reading the deposition of Dr.

Danny Homan, William A. Dotzler, Jr., Bruce Hunter, David Jacoby, Kirsten Running-Marquardt, and Daryl Beall v. Terry E. Branstad, Governor of the State of Iowa

812 N.W.2d 623 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 16, 2012

It further determined that the “field office” definition qualified the field office appropriation. … Accordingly, section 20 is not a condition that restricts or qualifies section 24.

Wiltsey v. Wiltsey

135 Iowa 430 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Nov 20, 1906

At the beginning of the trial it was" objected by proponents that the contestant had not qualified as administratrix and had failed to give bond. … or tend to establish the facts essential to support the verdict.

Immaculate Conception Corp. v. Iowa Department of Transportation

656 N.W.2d 513 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 23, 2003

Thus, for example, the exception would permit a fast-food establishment like McDonald’s to erect signage on its own property notwithstanding its proximity to the highway. Cf. Brazelton Group v. … The United States Supreme Court has recognized this distinction, clearly holding that “offsite commercial billboards may be prohibited while onsite commercial billboards are permitted.” Metromedia, Inc. v.

Theresa Huck v. Wyeth, Inc. D/B/A Wyeth Schwarz Pharma, Inc. and Pliva, Inc.

850 N.W.2d 353 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 11, 2014

immunity and applying Texas negligence law to claims against brand defendants); Lance, 85 A.3d at 458-60 (rejecting defense of manufacturer immunity and applying Pennsylvania negligence law to claims against brand defendants … established our legislature’s understanding of the duty”).

Futter v. Hout

225 Iowa 723 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Sep 20, 1938

But there was also evidence tending to establish that while appellant was so assuming, he Avas simultaneously conscious of the following facts: That a collision impended if the Hout car continued on its course; that at this … And if the jury found there was negligence on appellant’s part, it was clearly a question for the jury whether it was a concurring proximate cause. Miller v. U. P. Ry. Co., 290 U. S. 227 , 54 S. Ct. 172 , 78 L.

Young v. Miller

228 Iowa 741 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jun 18, 1940

Webber qualified as receiver on January 31, 1931. On March 5, 1931, his application as receiver to lease the premises to a tenant until March 1, 1932, was approved. … This acquiring of rents would clearly be “doings in the above premises” as phrased in the bond, that is, doings in the receivership. Of his such doings the. receiver had agreed, to render a true account.

State v. Mabrey

244 Iowa 415 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Feb 10, 1953

Clearly the trial court did not consider it. • We think defendant testified the bingo was free to ticket purchasers. … We seem to have established a practice of stating a criminal appeal is reversed when, on the State’s appeal, we find errors of law.

State v. McDaniel

265 N.W.2d 917 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 17, 1978

The State’s evidence of defendant’s prior relationship and transactions with Ed-ington was clearly admissible under this standard. … Even though Edington was assured immunity, her testimony did not constitute substantial evidence from which the jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt her participation in sexual relations with defendant was conditioned

Dille v. Longwell

188 Iowa 606 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 10, 1920

We prefer to 'act without regard to these cases, because, while the qualifying words considered in them are as indefinite as is “when the debts of the company are paid,” they qualified a definite promise to pay by *608 a … Everything necessary to constitute a promissory note, except the time of payment, is clearly expressed. * * * It could not have been contemplated that, if Jones never got his money from the government, or never should be

Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. v. Voeltz

431 N.W.2d 783 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Nov 23, 1988

Coverage may be extended to cover qualifying activities by attachment of an endorsement either at the date of issuance or during the policy term. … Clearly, there was a misunderstanding as to the meaning of the business pursuit exclusion, a misunderstanding caused by Grinnell Mutual.