Robert L. Larson

The case involved a farmer who sued his livestock insurance company seeking coverage for 14 heifers that died from pseudorabies, which he claimed was contracted via bites from infected wild animals or carrier hogs bitten by such animals, under a policy provision for loss by "attack by dogs or wild animals." The trial court dismissed the suit, concluding the policy did not cover indirect infectious results from an attack. On de novo review, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding that the term "attack" encompassed proximate results including disease from bites, even indirectly, and that the evidence established the loss was caused by wild animal attacks as the policy intended. The matter was remanded for judgment in the plaintiff's favor for the claimed damages.

business & regulatoryproperty

This case involved a mother's petition for child support under Iowa's Uniform Support of Dependents Law after she and the children moved to Georgia, while the father remained in Iowa. The Iowa district court ordered the father to pay monthly support but conditioned the award on the mother's cooperation with visitation and transportation arrangements, and also entered judgments against her for attorney fees, costs, and discovery violations. The mother appealed, arguing the court lacked jurisdiction in a support proceeding to address custody, visitation, property, or personal obligations against her. The Iowa Supreme Court held that chapter 252A limits jurisdiction to support issues and does not authorize orders on visitation or in personam judgments against the petitioner, and that full financial disclosure via interrogatories was needed before final support determination. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this jurisdictional limit.

family lawprocedure

The case involved a petition by the county attorney to transfer a delinquency complaint against minor Phillip Brown from juvenile court to district court under Iowa Code section 232.72. The juvenile court granted the transfer after the county attorney's opening statement but before any evidence was presented, based solely on the judge's review of the boy's prior record. Brown appealed, arguing that the statute required a hearing with evidence and findings that the transfer served the best interests of the child or the public. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the transfer order, ruling that the lack of a hearing with testimony and evidence violated the statutory requirements, rendering the order void, and remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Helen Robinson, who was convicted under Iowa Code section 239.14 for obtaining Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) payments through false pretenses by failing to report her new employment and other income changes to the welfare department, despite knowing she was required to do so. The trial court sentenced her to 90 days in jail, and she appealed on grounds that the verdict was against the evidence and that the statute was unconstitutionally vague. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the jury could reasonably disbelieve her testimony about reporting the changes based on the department's records and practices, and that the statute's terms like 'willfully false statement' and 'fraudulent device' provided sufficient notice of prohibited conduct to satisfy due process. The court also rejected her claim that she remained eligible for payments until the department made an adjustment, noting her actions prevented an accurate eligibility review.

criminal law

This case concerns a father's 1969 application to modify child support provisions in a 1966 Iowa divorce decree, which had already been adjusted in 1967 to tie payments to a percentage of his net income after the mother gained employment earning about $48 weekly take-home pay. The trial court granted the father a credit equal to half of the mother's earnings against his obligation, but the Iowa Supreme Court further modified the decree to require the father to pay a fixed $25 per week per child until each reaches the age of 18, marries, or finishes high school, allowing the mother to retain her earnings as supplemental support. The court reasoned that both parents are liable for child support in proportion to their ability to pay, that a definite fixed amount provides better predictability and meets the children's growing needs without inviting disputes over formulas, and that this approach accounts for factors beyond just income changes while remaining subject to future modification.

family law

The case involved a teacher suing a school district for breach of his continuing contract, claiming an improper dismissal without notice and hearing in April 1969 after conflicts with administrators. The trial court granted summary judgment to the school district, and the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that the April board actions and communications did not constitute an official termination or anticipatory breach, as the teacher continued receiving pay and no board-directed dismissal occurred until after proper notice and a hearing on August 1, 1969, rendering the suit premature.

labor & employmentprocedure