Case law

Davis v. City of Waterloo

551 N.W.2d 876 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 24, 1996

The court made a new finding of fact that Davis was clearly the most qualified applicant for the foreman position and clearly implied in that finding that it was the court’s belief that, absent the improper injection of race … It argues that: (1) Davis failed to establish a violation of state or federal civil rights laws because he did not show racial discrimination in the promotion; (2)the city’s affirmative action plan provided a nondiscriminatory

Farley v. Ginther

450 N.W.2d 853 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 24, 1990

Abuse of discretion is present only when such discretion is exercised on grounds or for reasons clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable. Rowen v. LeMars Mut. Ins. Co., 357 N.W.2d 579, 583 (Iowa 1984). … After pointing out that the question of whether plaintiffs have established negligence is almost never appropriate for summary judgment, this court determined that in an instance in which expert testimony is required to establish

State v. Lasley

705 N.W.2d 481 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Oct 28, 2005

The Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa (Tribe), owner of the establishment where the offense allegedly took place, sought the dismissal. … Clearly, this rule does not support the Tribe’s contention because the dismissal did not result from the magistrate’s or the prosecutor’s motion, but rather on the motion of the Tribe. See State v.

In Re Estate of Watters

201 Iowa 884 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 6, 1926

Her husband, Robert Steenhoek, was appointed administrator of her estate, and duly qualified. It is he who filed application for order in the instant matter. … Clearly, the application of the administrator, as well as the petition of the intervener, was for an order of court. It was a matter for the court to determine. The proceeding was in probate.

State Board of Regents v. Lindquist

188 N.W.2d 320 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jun 17, 1971

and immune from attack as a special law under the recent decisions in Green v. … If a general law clearly can be made applicable, a special law is impermissible. Heckler v. Conter, 206 Ind. 376 , 187 N.E. 878 ; cf. Owens v. Smith, 216 S.C. 382 , 58 S.E.2d 332 .

City of Hampton v. Iowa Civil Rights Commission

554 N.W.2d 532 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Sep 18, 1996

In other words, the protection afforded by anti-retaliatory legislation does not immunize the complainant from discharge for past or present inadequacies, *536 unsatisfactory performance, or insubordination. Id. at 48 . … The crux of the factual issue is whether the third prong, the causal connection, was established. See Hulme II, 480 N.W.2d at 42 .

State v. Healy

217 Iowa 1155 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Dec 12, 1933

The witnesses were properly qualified by their answers, and there was no error in permitting them to express their opinion, based upon smelling the liquid. State v. Ling, 198 Iowa 598 , 199 N. W. 285 ; State v. … Consequently the allegations of the indictment above referred to were clearly surplusage and not in issue. The state was under no duty to prove such allegations. State v. Parsons, 209 Iowa 540 , 228 N. W. 307 . V.

Schlader v. Interstate Power Co.

591 N.W.2d 10 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 24, 1999

Summary judgment may be appropriate in an instance in *12 which expert testimony is required to establish negligence or foundational facts, and expert testimony is unavailable, therefore no genuine issue of fact can be proved … We think, although expert testimony would clearly be helpful to fact finders in such a claim, it is not a condition precedent. Expert testimony is required in actions based upon the negligence of a professional.

Abbott v. City of Des Moines

230 Iowa 494 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jun 17, 1941

Clearly, therefore, the appellee city is not liable for the mere failure of its park board to keep and maintain the instrumentality or device in question, which was a part of the equipment of a public park established by … R. 1196, wherein the writer states, “The whole doctrine of governmental immunity from liability for torts rests upon a rotten foundation.”

Christensen v. Des Moines Still College of Osteopathy & Surgery

248 Iowa 810 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 7, 1957

Under the well-known and well-established rules of this court we must, of course, view the evidence most favorably to the prevailing party. *812 Plaintiff, 40 years of age, an employee of tbe John Deere plant in Des Moines … Section 150.4, Code of 1954, provides the requirements for a license to practice osteopathy, and clearly no corporation could so qualify.

Daryl D. Lang v. Linn County Board of Adjustment v. Linn County Board of Adjustment

829 N.W.2d 1 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 29, 2013

Nonetheless, the 6.52 acres clearly contained a large number of young trees, as well as preexisting wild trees. 2 *5 The Langs established at the Board hearing that they had enrolled their tree planting in DNR’s Resource … Our legislature clearly indicated by the 1963 amendment that the agricultural activities need not be “a primary means of livelihood.”

Barberton Rescue Mission, Inc. v. Insurance Division of the Iowa Department of Commerce

586 N.W.2d 352 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Nov 25, 1998

If the newsletter staff determines the expenses qualify for assistance, the newsletter publishes the name and address of the claimant. … Further, the newsletter has clearly made an effort to avoid reference to this plan as insurance in any of its written materials.

Moser v. Brown

249 N.W.2d 612 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jan 19, 1977

John Brown and Rita Farmer qualified as executors. On November 24, 1971 James Hart filed an answer which amounted to a general denial with certain affirmative defenses. … An overriding consideration is the well established principle that, so long as issues are covered by the instructions, a trial court is free to choose its own language and need not couch instructions in terms suggested by

Adams v. Fort Madison Community School District

182 N.W.2d 132 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Dec 15, 1970

Division II of the opinion recognizes that simple majority rule is clearly a basic tenet of our political system. … No. 621, 264 Minn. 279 , 118 N.W.2d 795, 803 (1962), in connection with governmental immunity. These problems have been handled by this court and other courts in similar cases. Cf. Kruidenier v.

State of Iowa v. Christine Ann Kern

831 N.W.2d 149 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 24, 2013

Cullison, rather, was our court’s effort to determine the scope of “an Iowa State parolee’s Fourth Amendment rights, privileges- and immunities.” Id. at 537 . … I would address the reasonable-suspicion issue by applying established Fourth Amendment precedent. In United States v.

United States Jaycees v. Iowa Civil Rights Commission

427 N.W.2d 450 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Jul 20, 1988

This amendment obviously clarifies the distinction between the “place, establishment, or facility” which qualifies as a “public accommodation” and the “organization or association” which uses the accommodation. … We hold that the United States Jaycees and the Iowa Jaycees do not qualify as “public accommodation[s]” within Iowa Code section 601A.2(10).

State v. Tracy

482 N.W.2d 675 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 18, 1992

In Turecek , we qualified the State’s right to impeach its own witnesses as follows: The right given to the State to impeach its own witnesses under Iowa Rule of Evidence 607 and our decision in State v. … Although this testimony clearly constitutes hearsay, the State argues that the exception embodied in rule 803(4) allows its admission.

Waterman v. Wood

185 Iowa 897 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Mar 21, 1919

If the record could fairly be said to establish these alleged facts, the defense would be perfect, and defendant could rightfully hold the possession so acquired, pending the delivery of the deed or the final adjudication … The merits of the case are clearly with the plaintiff,, and the judgment below is, therefore, affirmed, with costs.— Affirmed. Ladd, C. J., Gavnor and Stevens, JJ., concur.

Reter v. Davenport, Rock Island & North Western Railway Co.

243 Iowa 1112 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Sep 16, 1952

There are some other qualifying provisions not material here. Later sections (481.4, 481.5 and 481.6) provide that the one “primarily to be served” may be required to pay the cost of acquisition and construction. … For the purpose of constracting a track or tracks to any * * * manufactory, warehouse, or mercantile establishment.”

Peffers v. City of Des Moines

299 N.W.2d 675 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Dec 17, 1980

We also assume that if the legislature sought to remedy specific evils it would have clearly so indicated. Jahnke v. Incorporated City of Des Moines, 191 N.W.2d 780, 787 (Iowa 1971). … The preamble to the legislation states that the purpose of the enactment is to establish home rule for local government.