UPDATES & ANALYSIS
Iowa Court of Appeals: Reversing an agency’s fact-based ruling is the “Bigfoot of the legal community”
By Ryan Koopmans
When an administrative agency makes a ruling that depends, at least in part, upon factual determinations, it’s difficult to get that ruling overturned on appeal. This morning, in a two-page opinion, Iowa Court of Appeals Judge Christopher McDonald tells us how difficult:
We begin and end our analysis with the following observation: “The administrative process presupposes judgment calls are to be left to the agency. Nearly all disputes are won or lost there.” Sellers v. Emp’t Appeal Bd., 531 N.W.2d 645, 646 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995) (citations omitted). A case reversing final agency action on the ground the agency’s action is unsupported by substantial evidence or is irrational, illogical, or wholly unjustifiable is the Bigfoot of the legal community—an urban legend, rumored to exist but never confirmed. Here, the employer had a full and fair opportunity to present its evidence and argument to the deputy commissioner and the commissioner without success. The employer challenged the agency’s findings, conclusions, and application of the facts to the law in the district court without success. Like the district court, we have carefully examined the grainy eight millimeter film of the administrative record. We can add little to the thorough and well-reasoned ruling of the district court, and we will not reiterate the same analysis here. We conclude the agency’s findings are supported by substantial evidence, and its decision is not irrational, illogical, unreasonable, unjustifiable, arbitrary and capricious, or legally erroneous. The search for Bigfoot continues. The judgment of the district court is affirmed without further opinion.
But see:
FEATURED POSTS
November 2024 Opinion Roundup
The Iowa Supreme Court entered opinions in eleven cases in November 2024. In addition to the four cases covered in individual stories on the blog, the remaining opinions from November are summarized below.
Iowa Supreme Court to hear arguments in 10 cases Dec. 17 and 18
The Iowa Supreme Court will hear arguments in 10 cases Dec. 17 and 18, and three other cases will be submitted to the Court without oral argument. Following are brief summaries of the December cases.
No Fourth Amendment violation in vehicle search after drug-sniffing dog sticks its nose through an open window, Iowa Supreme Court holds
The Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure was not violated when a drug detection dog inserted its nose into the open window of a suspect’s vehicle, the Iowa Supreme Court held in a divided Dec. 6 decision.
Landowners challenging DOT eminent domain action missed a critical filing deadline, Iowa Supreme Court holds
Owners of farmland in Story County seeking to block the Iowa Department of Transportation’s condemnation of part of their property for a highway project succeeded in getting their appeal before the Iowa Supreme Court even after missing one filing deadline, but they lost their bid to revive their case in district court because they missed a second and critical deadline.
EDITORIAL TEAM
ABOUT
On Brief: Iowa’s Appellate Blog is devoted to appellate litigation with a focus on the Iowa Supreme Court, the Iowa Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.