Case law

Bauer v. Dann

428 N.W.2d 658 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Aug 19, 1988

The implication of Lems is clearly the contrary. In that case, although a dram shop cause of action did exist, this court found a parallel cause of action at common law. … It clearly applies to “social” hosts as well as all other persons.

State v. O'KELLY

211 N.W.2d 589 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 17, 1973

Omaha authorities charged defendant in Nebraska with burglary of the Delight Wholesale establishment and sought extradition. … Promise of Immunity. The trial court found on the evidence that defendant did not establish the Iowa officers promised him immunity from prosecution in this state.

Shelton v. State

644 N.W.2d 27 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 8, 2002

The first step is readily established. So is the second, determining whether the choices at issue were of the sort intended for protection under the discretionary exception. … These administrative choices, driven as they were by economics and aesthetics, are clearly matters into which courts in general and judges in particular are ill equipped to intrude. III.

Susan E. Cox and Edward A. Cox v. Iowa Department of Human Services

920 N.W.2d 545 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Nov 30, 2018

In this case, there is no dispute that the trusts qualify under § 1396p(d)(4)(C). … While the Medicaid statute does not define “transfer,” I conclude that if you establish a qualifying pooled trust, no transfer occurs.

Waters v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP.

784 N.W.2d 24 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jun 25, 2010

State, 625 N.W.2d 721, 729 (Iowa 2001) (“We have routinely held that a breach of duty owed to the public at large is not actionable unless the plaintiff can establish, based on the unique or particular facts of the case, … Clearly, the State’s motion for summary judgment sought judgment on the claim for negligence pertaining to the failure to remove the Deeds vehicle, but the motion did so only on two grounds.

Wright v. Daniels

164 N.W.2d 180 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 14, 1969

The court said that "this course of reasoning assumes the very thing to be established." (loc. cit. 184) The court rejected the argument and held that the wife could not sue her husband for a tort. III. … It would be difficult to find a case more clearly pointing to the need for modification of the common-law principle of interspousal immunity.

Reuven Weizberg, David Peter Veng-Pedersen, Jacob Patrick Dagel v. City of Des Moines, Iowa, and Gatso USA, Inc.

923 N.W.2d 200 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Aug 31, 2018

The District Court Correctly Dismissed the Equal Protection, Substantive Due Process, and "Privileges and Immunities" Claims. … In any event, a city's mere violation of state law does not establish a *224 substantive due process violation. See Hughes v. City of Cedar Rapids , 112 F.Supp.3d 817 , 846 (N.D.

Wittrup v. Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co.

226 N.W.2d 822 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 19, 1975

in a situation clearly entailing foreseeable harm or damage to plaintiff and others driving through the underpass. … Defendant could certainly have erected a barricade or sign to direct traffic toward the old established crossing until the construction work was completed.”

Diamond Auto Sales, Inc. v. Erbe

251 Iowa 1330 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 18, 1960

“Laws of uniform operation — grant of privileges or immunities. “Section 6. … Thus, other businesses are not subject to the need for services of, or inspection by, a qualified mechanic.

K & W ELEC., INC. v. State

712 N.W.2d 107 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 7, 2006

Design-and-Construction Immunity. … The State has established as a matter of law that it is immune from tort liability for its design and construction of the highway project in question because the highways were constructed "in accordance with a *121 generally

Estate of Leonard, Ex Rel., Palmer v. Swift

656 N.W.2d 132 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 23, 2003

This act clearly reflects the requirements imposed on a guardian ad litem, but is not necessarily inconsistent with actions an attorney might take. … The undisputed facts conclusively establish that he functioned as a guardian ad litem in the underlying conservatorship proceeding. Therefore, he is entitled to absolute immunity for his actions in that matter.

National Bank of Burlington v. Huneke

250 Iowa 1030 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 24, 1959

The clearly-stated purpose was to -aid the public health and welfare of the community- by the establishment and maintenance of a nonprofit hospital. … It is the eleemosynary trust which provides that - the beneficial interest is an institution established for a public use that qualifies appellee for this exemption, not its status as a trustee.

John R. Grubb, Inc. v. Iowa Housing Finance Authority

255 N.W.2d 89 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 25, 1977

We cannot say this finding is clearly unreasonable and arbitrary. … Thus Shotts is clearly distinguishable from the case before us.

Bagnall v. Iowa-Des Moines National Bank & Trust Co.

238 Iowa 905 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 14, 1947

The following decisions of the United States Supreme Court clearly establish that under the pertinent federal acts property purchased or acquired with benefit payments, of. the kind here under consideration, has no immunity … Supp. 961 -963, the facts clearly distinguish it.

Duckworth v. District Court

220 Iowa 1350 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 21, 1936

which the statute furnished immunity. … Clearly, if one is called into a judicial proceeding in which his guilt or innocence is involved, he cannot be required to testify as to any matter which would tend to incriminate him.

Lewis v. State

256 N.W.2d 181 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jun 29, 1977

A reading of chapter 123 demonstrates the legislature clearly did not intend to include commission employees within the *187 grant of immunity provided by section 123.-13. … The legislature obviously had no problem identifying and distinguishing members of the commission and employees thereof and only afforded the immunity established by section 123.13 to the commission and the members thereof

State v. Gaston

79 Iowa 457 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Feb 8, 1890

The defendant, however, claims that he has the right to fill the office until his successor is elected and qualified, and that he is entitled to hold the office if not qualified, as no successor has been qualified. … The court- was authorized to find that defendant failed to establish either verbal or recorded direction on the subject.

Iowa Insurance Institute, Iowa Defense Counsel Association, Iowa Self-Insurers' Association, Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, and Iowa Association of Business and Industry v. Core Group of the Iowa Association for Justice Christopher J. Godfrey, Workers' Compensation Commissioner, Division of Workers' Compensation And Th

Supreme Court of Iowa · Jun 12, 2015

The majority concludes section 85.27(2) cannot effect a waiver of work product protection because the work product doctrine provides qualified immunity from discovery rather than a “privilege.” … But, once established, an immunity leads courts to only one possible conclusion, while a privilege does not.

State v. Wilson

166 Iowa 309 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Nov 22, 1913

, and that every juror wás actually qualified. … This principle is stated clearly in Wilson v. State, 60 N. J.

City of Panora v. Simmons

445 N.W.2d 363 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Aug 16, 1989

Responsibility of Business Establishments. … It is a basic principle of due process that an enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined. Vague laws offend several important values.