A couple of teenage boys are out for some dirt-bike and ATV riding at rural retreat when one of the boys is fatally injured in a tragic shooting accident. The farmhouse on the retreat where the shooting occurred is insured by a homeowners’ policy and by a separate commercial general liability …
Jurors in a Pottawattamie County medical malpractice trial submitted a question to the court during jury deliberations about the meaning of instructions given to them by the trial judge for apportioning fault to a settled party, but the judge did not commit a prejudicial error by failing to cla …
The Iowa Supreme Court added another category of police searches where it invoked the Iowa Constitution to extend broader protection than the U.S. Supreme Court has granted under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
For drivers whose vehicles ar …
Van Buren County Attorney Abraham Watkins was removed from office by a District Court judge who ruled that Watkins “engaged in misconduct or maladministration by regularly committing sexual harassment” of female employees.
The court record reciting Watk …
Iowa’s mandatory sex-offender registry for juveniles who commit a sex offense by force is the equivalent of criminal punishment, a divided Iowa Supreme Court ruled June 15, but it’s not unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.
Thus, the Court co …
The Iowa Court of Appeals selects certain opinions for publication in the Northwestern Reporter. On July 3, 2024, the Court of Appeals selected four opinions for publication. Following are summaries of those opinions.
The Iowa Supreme Court entered opinions in eighteen cases during May 2024. Opinions from May not covered elsewhere on this blog are summarized below.
Does a drug-sniffing dog violate a suspect’s constitutional protection against unreasonable government search and seizure by putting its paws up on the suspect’s car at the urging of its handler?
Five members of the Iowa Supreme Court said that subjecting the suspect’s car to a sniff by a drug-sniffing dog violated …
A defendant’s right under the Iowa Constitution to confront witnesses at trial is not satisfied by one-way video testimony where the witness testifying on camera is not able to see the defendant, the Iowa Supreme Court held in a 4-3 ruling handed down June 28. In reaching that conclusion, the Court declined to follow a U.S. Supreme Court precedent and overruled one of its own prior rulings.
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.
