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
State worker failed to prove boss created a hostile work environment, Iowa Supreme Court holds
The Iowa Supreme Court remanded a $790,000 jury award for a state employee’s hostile-work environment claim to Polk County District Court for entry of a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which erases the damage award. The Court held that the plaintiff failed to prove her hostile work environment claim based on what she herself experienced.
Iowa Supreme Court to hear arguments April 11 on constitutionality of Iowa’s fetal cardiac activity abortion statute
The Iowa Supreme Court will hear its final oral argument of the 2023-24 term Thursday. The Court saved the term’s most-watched case for last: an appeal addressing whether Iowa’s law banning abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy may be enforced.
The oral argument in Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, et al …
Iowa Supreme Court to hear arguments in eight cases Apr. 10-11
The Iowa Supreme Court will hear arguments in eight cases April 10 and 11. Four other cases will be submitted to the Court without oral argument. Following are brief summaries of the April arguments.
February 2024 Opinion Roundup
The Iowa Supreme Court entered opinions in eighteen cases during February 2024. You can read Rox Laird’s analysis of Singh v. McDermott, Selden v. DMACC, and Senator Roby Smith et al. v. Iowa District Court for Polk County. The remaining opinions from February are summarized here.
APPELLATE CALENDAR
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.