District Court, S.D. Iowa — appointed by Jimmy Carter
Lincoln National Life Insurance v. Payne
District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2003-07-25 · cited 2×
This case involved Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and related parties seeking to vacate a National Association of Securities Dealers arbitration award in favor of former agent Thomas Payne under the Federal Arbitration Act, following disputes over contract termination, performance, and related claims among agents. The underlying disputes had originated in state court but were submitted to binding NASD arbitration by agreement. After the arbitration panel awarded Payne over $1.2 million on claims including interference with contract and breach of fiduciary duty, Lincoln moved to vacate the award, arguing the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law by failing to specify the basis for the award and by reaching an unsupported result. The court denied the motion to vacate, finding insufficient evidence of manifest disregard, granted Payne's motion to confirm, and entered judgment on the award with interest.
procedurebusiness & regulatory
Northern Natural Gas Co. v. Munns
District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2003-02-28 · cited 3×
The case involved interstate natural gas pipeline companies challenging Iowa state laws and regulations under Iowa Code chapter 479A and 199 Iowa Administrative Code chapters 9 and 12, which set standards for topsoil replacement, erosion control, drain tile repair, and land restoration during pipeline construction. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, arguing these rules were preempted by the federal Natural Gas Act and FERC regulations under the Supremacy Clause, violated the Contract Clause by altering easement terms, and gave rise to § 1983 liability. The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion while denying the defendants' motion. The core reasoning examined field and conflict preemption, drawing on the comprehensive federal regulatory scheme for interstate pipelines and prior Eighth Circuit decisions finding similar state environmental rules preempted.
federal powerenvironmentbusiness & regulatory
United States v. Hunt
District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2003-02-03 · cited 1×
In United States v. Hunt, defendant Karl Lynn Hunt faced federal charges including conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute controlled substances (Counts 1-3) and obstruction of justice (Count 4) based on an alleged bribe offer to a narcotics agent after his arrest. Following an earlier ruling suppressing evidence from an unconstitutional vehicle search and prolonged detention as violations of the Fourth Amendment, the court addressed whether that evidence, particularly the bribe statement and its arrest context, could be introduced at trial on Count 4. The court held that the statement and limited contextual evidence of the drug-related arrest were admissible for the obstruction count. It reasoned that the exclusionary rule's purposes were already served by barring the evidence from the drug charges, any additional deterrent effect from further exclusion would be minimal or speculative, and jurors require sufficient background to fairly evaluate the obstruction allegation without an incomplete factual picture.
criminal lawprocedure
Leach v. Mediacom
District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2003-01-13 · cited 4×
In Leach v. Mediacom, plaintiff David Leach, a producer of a public access program, sued the cable company after it refused to air episodes containing graphic, unblurred images of aborted fetuses and footage of a Planned Parenthood clinic, alleging that the refusal violated the editorial control prohibition in section 531(e) of the Cable Communications Policy Act. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of standing. The court reasoned that section 531(e) does not create an express or implied private right of action, based on the statute's text, structure, and remedies, as well as Supreme Court guidance in Alexander v. Sandoval that congressional silence does not imply a private remedy when other enforcement mechanisms exist.
free speechbusiness & regulatoryprocedure
United States v. Campa-Fabela
District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2002-06-24 · cited 1×
The case involved defendant Efrain Campa-Fabela, who was convicted by a jury of illegal reentry into the United States and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and sentenced to 188 months in prison. After his direct appeals were exhausted and the Supreme Court denied certiorari on April 30, 2001, he filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in June 2002 seeking to vacate or correct his sentence. The court summarily dismissed the motion as barred by the one-year statute of limitations. The reasoning was that a conviction becomes final, starting the limitations clock, when the Supreme Court denies a petition for certiorari unless that order is suspended, and the defendant offered no evidence of suspension; the court adopted the holding of other circuits that rehearing denial does not extend the finality date.
criminal lawprocedure
Hill v. MCI WorldCom Communications, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2001-04-23 · cited 4×
The case involved plaintiff Peggy Hill suing MCI WorldCom for disclosing her confidential long-distance calling records and related personal information to an unauthorized third party, her ex-husband, after she had paid for an unlisted number and confidentiality assurances. Hill asserted one federal claim under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and two state-law claims for invasion of privacy (intrusion upon seclusion and public disclosure of embarrassing facts) plus negligence. The court dismissed the ECPA claim with prejudice under prior precedent and dismissed the intrusion-upon-seclusion claim with prejudice for failure to allege the requisite highly offensive conduct, but denied dismissal of the public-disclosure and negligence claims, finding they sufficiently stated causes of action under Iowa law. The court also rejected MCI's filed-rate-doctrine defense, concluding that no tariff provision addressed confidentiality of customer account information and that damage recovery would not undermine uniform rate regulation.
torts & liabilityprocedurebusiness & regulatory