Case law

In Re the Guardianship of T.H.

589 N.W.2d 67 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Feb 17, 1999

The Iowa guardianship proceeding challenged here clearly qualifies as a “custody determination” under the PKPA. … Iowa clearly qualifies as a home state under this test. There remain, however, other requirements.

McFarland v. Stewart

109 Iowa 561 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 26, 1899

Stewart was appointed sole executor, and qualified as such on June 30, 1896. … We are clearly of the opinion that the district court of Harrison county had no jurisdiction to grant any of the relief ashed. — Reversed.

Stice v. Consolidated Indiana Coal Co.

228 Iowa 1031 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 2, 1940

The legislative history of the act, if in the record, might readily establish as verities the two first-mentioned probabilities. If there are any sustaining authorities, they have not been cited. … The rehearing was ordered by the commissioner in order that he might enable himself to obey mandatory law, and clearly not to accord to claimant a right thereto.

Ganrud v. Smith

206 N.W.2d 311 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 28, 1973

It is not enough that a witness be generally qualified in a certain area, he must also be qualified to answer the particular question propounded. Tiemeyer v. McIntosh, Iowa, 176 N.W.2d 819, 824 ; Karr v. … Brown and Billings testify at great length establishing education, past experience and specific qualifications in the area of accident investigation and reconstruction.

Lyle E. Schneider, Paul S. Kurtz And Shirley J. Kurtz, Gene J. Peters, Sterling Tops, Inc., Robert W. Bonorden And Deann M. Bonorden, Gerald W. Petersen, Richard R. Kane And Debra K. Kane, Mark A. Doepke And Michelle L. Doepke, Gloria M. Knapp Freilinger, Rudy Busch D/b/a Rudy's Sales And Service, Paul R. Beem And Stacie L. Beem, David J. Fink And Deb Fink, Davik's Auto Body/denver Oil Company, Randall-mar

Supreme Court of Iowa · May 21, 2010

When viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, the summary judgment record could establish the following facts. … Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s determination that the State established its immunity defense under section 669.14(8) against the “permanent devaluation” damage claims of plaintiffs who did not sell their properties

Hawkeye Bank v. State

515 N.W.2d 348 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 20, 1994

Clearly, in the present case, the initial notice of suit in the name of “Estate of Jessica L. Smith” adequately conveyed to the State the nature of the claim being made. … The alleged lack of supervision of and accounting for the deceased minor child may not be established as conforming with a policy determination of superior authority.

Stuart v. Pilgrim

247 Iowa 709 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 10, 1956

Such an interpretation is clearly not within the language of the statute, and should not be read into it by a forced and unnatural construction. … The negligent third party deserves no immunity from damages as against a non-negligent bailor.”

Farnum v. GD Searle & Co., Inc.

339 N.W.2d 392 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 19, 1983

Strict time lines are established in the Local Budget Law. See ch. 24. … In two cases, courts have upheld statutes granting immunity at one level of government while denying it at another. See Aubertin v.

Bosworth v. Western Mutual Aid Society

75 Iowa 582 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 22, 1888

Clearly there was such evidence. Not only so, we think the court could not have made any other finding than.it did. It is fully sustained by the evidence. 1. … In a reply the appellants pleaded a waiver of the non-payment of the assessments, and the court found *584 that they had failed to establish such defense.

State v. Kaufman

51 Iowa 578 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Sep 18, 1879

All qualified electors of the State * * are competent jurors in their respective counties.” Code, gg 227, 1397. Both these statutory provisions have equal force. If one can be waived, so may the other. … That a defendant in a criminal action, by silence, may waive the benefit of a statutory provision was clearly recognized. There are several other decisions which recognize the same principle. Hughes v.

Rozanne E. King Alisha Jane King Dacie S. Houston, Individually and as Mother and Next Friend of Skylar Dwayne Ostrander, Chay Cortez Ostrander, and Adlia William Cortez Flood III Brandy R. Drake, Individually and as Mother and Next Friend of Logan Genner Luhmann, Susan Maule, Stephanie Maule, and Jacob Maule Michael Campbell, Individually and as Father and Next Friend of George Campbell and Soph

818 N.W.2d 1 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 20, 2012

Our independent role in our application of equal protection concepts pursuant to the privileges and immunities clause of the Iowa Constitution is a firmly established feature of our legal tradition from the very first days … The petition is not very precise and does not clearly outline what government action is causing what deprivation.

Boyle v. Burt

179 N.W.2d 513 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Sep 2, 1970

Briefly stated, section 613A.S qualifies a right given by other related provisions of the Act. … This means it it not within our province to read words or meaning out of a statute there clearly expressed.

State v. Long

628 N.W.2d 440 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 31, 2001

The trial court’s determinations of these preliminary facts may not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous. … We believe the evidence of her statements was clearly inadmissible. Moreover, we presume prejudice to the nonoffering party unless the contrary is affirmatively established. State v.

City of Sioux City v. Greater Sioux City Press Club

421 N.W.2d 895 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 13, 1988

Appellants urge that, prior to the enactment of section 22.7(18), the subject of employment applications was clearly recognized as a recurring area of controversy under the public disclosure provisions of chapter 22. … We disagree that the circumstances outlined here serve to establish that these communications were “required by law, rule, or procedure” within the meaning of the act.

McKeever v. Batcheler

219 Iowa 93 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Dec 11, 1934

Such is clearly not the law. … These witnesses were no better qualified to give an opinion as to the identity of these tracks than the jurors themselves.

Brown v. First National Bank of Mason City

193 N.W.2d 547 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 14, 1972

We conclude, therefore, it was not error for the trial court to refuse to instruct the jury on qualified privilege, or to direct a verdict on the basis a qualified privilege existed, or to submit the question of qualified … In determining whether plaintiff has established her case as herein set out, you may consider only the statements made by defendant that are set out in Exhibits ‘A’ and ‘B’ and no others.”

AFSCME/Iowa Council 61 v. State

484 N.W.2d 390 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 25, 1992

Department of Social Servs., 207 N.W.2d 117, 122 (Iowa 1973) (State, by entering into a contract, agrees to be answerable for its breach and waives its immunity from suit to that extent.). … All limitations or impairments suggested by the State as qualifying under section 20.17(6) were derived from actions of, or were under the control of, the State.

Keefe v. Bernard

774 N.W.2d 663 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 30, 2009

Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.503(3) codifies a qualified immunity from discovery of materials prepared in anticipation of litigation. 10 Shook, 497 N.W.2d at 886 . … The Keefes claim special circumstances establish a substantial need for the memorandum authored by Rouwenhorst in this case. Without the memorandum, the Keefes assert they cannot otherwise know if Dr.

Ruthven Consolidated School District v. Emmetsburg Community School District

382 N.W.2d 136 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Feb 19, 1986

Pending litigation should be absolutely immune from changes wrought by political process. … A neighboring district should not qualify as “affected,” thus making it eligible to wreak havoc on a reorganization plan merely because it has designs on all or part of the same territory.

State v. Jackson

422 N.W.2d 475 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 13, 1988

His argument in this vein alluded to two well-established doctrines: collateral estoppel and episodic immunity. Collateral estoppel is clearly not at issue here. … Episodic immunity, although related to collateral estoppel, is a distinct legal doctrine. It was advanced by Justice Brennan in his concurring opinion in Ashe v. Swenson.