UPDATES & ANALYSIS

12.16

Iowa Supreme Court to hear arguments in 10 cases Dec. 17 and 18

by Rox Laird | December 16, 2024

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. [Go to On Brief’s “Cases in the Pipeline” page to read briefs filed in these cases.]

 

Abbas, et al.  v. Franklin County Board of Supervisors

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 17, 9 a.m.

Question: Did the Franklin County District Court err in awarding damages to property owners affected by drainage district repairs?

The Franklin County Board of Supervisors, as trustees of Drainage District 48, seek further review of a May 22 Iowa Court of Appeals ruling affirming the Franklin County District Court’s decision regarding assessments of damages related to repairs made to Franklin County Drainage District 48. The plaintiffs – members of the Abbas family and related trusts; the Hanson family and a related company; and Bruce Reid and Lynette Meyer and the Roy and Neva Stover Trust – assert that the drainage district’s repairs impede their farming and decreased the value of their land. The Court of Appeals held that the district court did not err in concluding that award of damages fell within the permissible range. In seeing further review, the defendant-appellants argue the Court of Appeals erred in allowing the award of severance damages.

 

In re N.F.

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 17, 9 a.m.

Questions: Does the State have a right to appeal a trial court ruling restoring firearms rights to a petitioner who lost those rights due to a previous involuntary commitment?

The State and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services appeal a Monona County District Court ruling restoring N.F. ‘s firearms rights, which were removed due to his involuntary commitment in 2016 for a serious mental impairment and substance-abuse disorder. The State argues the district court erred in disregarding N.F.’s substance abuse committal in reaching its decision because it believed it could not properly do so, and N.F. failed to meet his burden of proof at the hearing. A question raised in this case is whether the State has a right of appeal in actions under Iowa Code section 724.31, which governs persons subject to firearms disabilities due to mental health commitments. N.F argues only petitioners, and no other persons, have a right of appeal of adverse decisions under the statute.

 

Degeneffe v. Home Pride Contractors Inc.

Will be submitted to the Court Dec. 17 without oral argument.

Question: Is a roofer’s contract that contains a 1.5% per month late-payment charge subject to the Iowa Consumer Credit Code?

Home Pride Contractors appeal a Boone County District Court decision granting plaintiff-appellees Lance and Tracy Degeneffe’s motion for summary judgment finding that their roof replacement contract with Home Pride constitutes a consumer credit sale subject to the Iowa Consumer Credit Code. Home Pride argues on appeal that the district court erred in concluding that its roofing contract with the Degeneffes is subject to the Iowa Consumer Credit Code because Home Pride does not extend credit or lend money to its customers, and its contract provision for collecting a 1.5% per month late payment charge is expressly excluded from the definition of a finance charge under the Iowa Consumer Credit Code.

 

League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa v. Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, et al.

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 17, 1:30 p.m.

Question: Did the Polk County District Court err in dissolving a permanent injunction that barred the Secretary of State’s use of non-English voting materials a decade after it was entered?

Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, the Iowa Voter Registration Commission, and five county auditors appeal the Polk County District Court’s order granting summary judgment to the League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa and dissolving a permanent injunction issued in 2008 that permanently enjoined the Secretary of State from printing Iowa’s official voter registration forms in languages other than English. Pate argues the district court erred in part because there was no substantial change in the facts or the law to justify dissolving the 2008 injunction more than a decade later. Pate also argues the district court erred in holding that a broad range of voting materials are exempt from Iowa’s English-only statute by a provision of the statute that exempts the use of any language necessary to secure rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

An amicus curiae brief in support of the defendant-appellants Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, et al., was filed with the Court by 26 Iowa state senators.

 

MIMG CLXXXII Retreat on 6th v. Miller

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 17, 1:30 p.m.

Question: Is Iowa’s statutory three-day eviction notice requirement preempted by the 2020 federal CARES Act even after the federal Act’s 2020 automatic expiration?

MIMG CLXXXII Retreat on 6th appeals the Linn County District Court’s decisions dismissing its action to evict tenant Mackenzie Miller for nonpayment of rent after giving Miller the three-day notice as required by Iowa law. The Retreat argues the district court erred in holding that Iowa’s three-day eviction notice requirement in Iowa Code Chapter 648 is preempted by the federal CARES Act enacted during the Covid-19 pandemic that extended eviction deadlines to 30 days. The Retreat argues the federal moratorium on evictions was by its own terms a temporary measure that automatically expired July 25, 2020, and the district court incorrectly concluded the CARES Act provision regarding the 30-day notice contained no explicit expiration date and thus continues in perpetuity.

An amicus curiae brief in favor of the plaintiff-appellant was filed by a group of landlords and property owners. An amicus curiae brief in support of the defendant-appellee was filed by Iowa Legal Aid.

 

MIMG CLXXXII Retreat on 6th v. Williams

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 17, 1:30 p.m.

Question: Is Iowa’s statutory three-day eviction notice requirement preempted by the 2020 federal CARES Act even after the federal Act’s 2020 automatic expiration?

MIMG CLXXXII Retreat on 6th appeals the Linn County District Court’s decisions dismissing its action to evict tenant Nathan Williams for nonpayment of rent after giving Williams the three-day notice as required by Iowa law. The Retreat argues the district court erred in holding that Iowa’s three-day eviction notice requirement in Iowa Code Chapter 648 is preempted by the federal CARES Act enacted during the Covid-19 pandemic that extended eviction deadlines to 30 days. The Retreat argues the federal moratorium on evictions was by its own terms a temporary measure that automatically expired July 25, 2020, and the district court incorrectly concluded the CARES Act provision regarding the 30-day notice contained no explicit expiration date and thus continues in perpetuity.

An amicus curiae brief in favor of the plaintiff-appellant was filed by a group of landlords and property owners. An amicus curiae brief in support of the defendant-appellee was filed by Iowa Legal Aid.

 

Principal Securities Inc. v. Gelbman

Will be submitted to the Court Dec. 17 without oral argument.

Question: Did the Polk County District Court properly vacate an arbitration award?

Mark Gelbman seeks further review of a divided March 27 Iowa Court of Appeals decision affirming the Polk County District Court’s ruling vacating an arbitration award regarding a form filed with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority by Principal Securities, his former employer. In arbitration proceedings Gelbman claimed statements made by Principal on the form filed with the regulator were defamatory or misleading, and the arbitrator granted him relief. The district court vacated the award, finding it was not supported by substantial evidence. Two members of the Court of Appeals agreed; the third member of the panel dissented, saying he would reverse the district court and let the award stand because substantial evidence supports the arbitration award.

 

Eugene Sikora v. State of Iowa, et al.

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 18, 9 a.m.

Question: Should a plaintiff have been able to claim a violation of his constitutional rights under the Iowa Supreme Court’s 2017 Godfrey decision before it was overturned?

Eugene Sikora appeals the Polk County District Court’s summary judgment dismissal of his false imprisonment and related claims against the State and Beth Skinner in her official capacity as Director of the Iowa Department of Corrections (DOC), claiming his constitutional rights were violated when the State held him in prison nearly five months after his prison sentence should have ended due to the DOC’s miscalculation of his time served. On appeal, he argues the district court erred in dismissing all of his claims, including those raised pursuant to the Iowa Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Geoffrey v. State, subsequently overturned in 2023 in Burnett v. Smith. Sikora argues Burnett’s overturning of Godfrey should be applied prospectively, not retroactively, saying he should not be prejudiced by the court’s change in direction.

 

Chandler, et al., v. Iowa Department of Corrections

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 18, 9 a.m.

Question: Does the Peace Officers’ Bill of Rights create a private right of action for aggrieved State correctional officers challenging a disciplinary investigation?

Iowa Department of Corrections (DOC) officers Michael Chandler, Eddie Jones, and Chad Maddison appeal on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, urging the Iowa Supreme Court to reverse the Polk County District Court’s dismissal of their claims that they were wrongly denied access to investigative files related to the DOC’s disciplinary action against them in violation of their rights guaranteed by peace officers’ bill of rights (Iowa Code Chapter 80F). They argue the district court erred in holding that the Legislature’s amendment to Code section 80F.1(13) in 2021 did not create a private right of action and that the plaintiffs’ remedy is the grievance process or administrative procedure.

An amicus curiae brief was filed with the Court in this case by the Iowa Professional Fire Fighters Association in support of the plaintiffs-appellants.

 

Hunter Three Farms LLC v. Hunter

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 18, 9 a.m.

Question: Can a limited liability company with three members bring suit against one of its members when only two of the three members approve of the company’s suit?

Richard Hunter seeks further review of a divided Jan 24 Iowa Court of Appeals decision reversing the Green County District Court’s ruling granting summary judgment to Hunter, one of three member-managers of Hunter Three Farms LLC, holding that the company lacked standing to sue him because filing suit required unanimous consent of all member-managers and he did not consent to being sued. Two members of a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals held that Iowa Code Chapter 489, which governs limited liability companies, authorizes an LLC to sue one of its members for breach of fiduciary duties without requiring unanimous consent. A third member of the panel dissented, arguing that the plain text of Chapter 489 requires that the LLC must have the consent of all members to sue one of its members.

[Disclosure: Nyemaster Goode attorneys Brianna Long and Spencer Cady represent appellee Richard Hunter in this appeal.]

 

Diercks and Holst v. Scott County and Kerri Tompkins

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 18, 1:30 p.m.

Question: Did Scott County properly refuse to publicly identify applicants for appointment to a vacancy on the County Board of Supervisors?

Dr. Allen Diercks and Diane Holst appeal the Scott County District Court’s ruling granting summary judgment to Scott County and County Auditor Kerri Tompkins, whom Diercks and Holst sued seeking the names of applicants for appointment to a vacancy on the Scott County Board of Supervisors. Tompkins, Scott County Treasurer Tony Knobbe, and County Recorder Rita Vargas convened as members of a Vacancy Committee to make the appointment using a list of applicants they did not publicly disclose. Dierks and Holst argue the district court erred in finding the case was controlled by the Iowa Supreme Court’s 1988 ruling in City of Sioux City v. Greater Sioux City Press Club, which held the names of applicants for a city manager position could be kept confidential because the Legislature exempted applications for public employment from the Iowa Open Records Act. Dierks and Holst argue that exception does not apply in this case because a county supervisor is a public official, not a public employee.

An amicus curiae brief was filed with the Court by the Iowa Freedom of Information Council in support of the plaintiffs.

 

Belhak and Elfila v. Smith and Women’s Care Specialists

Scheduled for oral argument Dec. 18, 1:30 p.m.

Question: Should a specification of negligence have been submitted to a jury in a medical practice case in the absence of supporting evidence?

Fatima E. Belhak and Abdellatif Elfila seek further review of a May 8 Iowa Court of Appeals ruling reversing the Scott County jury’s medical malpractice verdict that Denice Smith M.D. caused Fatima Belhak’s injury following childbirth by using the wrong size of suture to repair an episiotomy. The Court of Appeals remanded the case for a new trial. In seeking further review, Belhak and Elfila argue that, contrary to the Court of Appeals’ decision, the district court did not commit error by submitting to the jury a specification negligence related to the suture size.

 

Trane v. State

Will be submitted to the Court Dec. 18 without oral argument.

Question: Was a defendant’s counsel ineffective in failing to move to sever child-endangerment and sex-abuse charges against him?

Benjamin G. Trane appeals the Lee County (South) District Court’s decision that his trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to move to sever child-endangerment and sex-abuse charges against him in post-conviction relief proceedings following his conviction of assault with intent to commit sex abuse, sexual exploitation by a school counselor, and child endangerment. The charges were related to a private school in Keokuk for troubled youth Trane owned and operated. The State cross-appeals, arguing the district court erred in finding that Trane’s counsel was ineffective for not objecting to a jury instruction on child endangerment.

Tags: Iowa Supreme Court 2024-25