Arthur A. McGiverin

The case involved Midwest Janitorial Supply Corporation and its officers suing former vice president and director David Greenwood and his new company, alleging that Greenwood breached fiduciary duties by preparing to form a competing janitorial supply business while still serving as an officer and director. The district court dismissed the claims after a bench trial based on findings that Greenwood's pre-resignation activities were limited to brief preparations such as contacting a realtor and investigating equipment and financing. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a director or officer is not liable for mere preparations to compete unless those acts cause a discrete harm to the corporation beyond the competition that eventually occurs, and no such harm was shown here given the short timeframe and lack of evidence linking any actions to diverted business.

business & regulatory

The case concerned disciplinary proceedings against Iowa attorney Robert M. Sherman for his handling of a client's domestic relations matter involving potential common-law marriage, custody, and support issues. Sherman neglected the case by failing to take action over many months despite receiving a retainer, leading the client to hire new counsel, and he also failed to respond to the Ethics Board's inquiries about the resulting complaint despite multiple extensions. The Iowa Supreme Court, reviewing de novo, agreed with the Grievance Commission that the evidence and Sherman's admissions proved violations of disciplinary rules DR 6-101(A)(3), DR 7-101(A)(2), DR 1-102(A)(5), and DR 1-102(A)(6). The court imposed a public reprimand, factoring in Sherman's prior admonitions and reprimands for similar conduct along with considerations of deterrence and public protection.

procedurefamily law

The case concerned whether the City of Muscatine could file a personal judgment action against property owners to recover costs of demolishing a nuisance building on their property after the owners failed to respond to notices. The district court ruled in favor of the city under Iowa Code section 364.12(4), the court of appeals reversed, and the Iowa Supreme Court vacated the reversal and affirmed the district court judgment. The court reasoned that section 364.12(4) explicitly authorizes a city to seek reimbursement for nuisance abatement costs via civil action against the property owner, that section 446.20(2) did not apply or limit this remedy because the county held only a tax certificate and no deed had issued, and that the owners remained liable as title holders.

propertyprocedure

Pamela Kershner sued the City of Burlington, alleging that the city's fire department was negligent in responding to a fire at her home by dispatching only one truck and three firefighters, contrary to its written policy, which allowed the fire to spread and destroy the house. The district court granted the city's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case, concluding that the claim was barred by the immunity provision of Iowa Code section 670.4(11) for acts or omissions in connection with an emergency response. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that the statutory language plainly grants immunity whenever a claim arises from conduct tied to an emergency response, without regard to internal policies or the adequacy of the response.

torts & liability

Bernard Mauk petitioned to correct an entry in Iowa's child abuse registry alleging that he had sexually abused his daughter L.M. in 1988; after the Department of Human Services denied the request, an administrative law judge held an evidentiary hearing but quashed Mauk's subpoenas for L.M. and his son J.M. to testify. The Iowa Supreme Court held that the ALJ erred in refusing to allow the children to be called as witnesses and reversed the district court and court of appeals decisions that had upheld the agency's action. The court reasoned that the ALJ's stated grounds for quashing the subpoenas—concerns about the children's memory and best interests—were not supported by substantial evidence in the record and that Mauk had a statutory right to present witnesses in the contested-case hearing on the registry correction. The case was remanded to the agency for a new hearing at which L.M. and J.M. would be permitted to testify.

family lawprocedure

The case involved parents suing the manufacturers of a smoke detector after a home fire killed one child and severely burned another, alleging that the detector was defective and failed to sound an alarm. A jury awarded the plaintiffs substantial compensatory and punitive damages on theories including negligence, strict liability, and breach of warranties. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court committed reversible error by admitting consumer complaints about other detectors failing to alarm and by submitting the issue of punitive damages to the jury. The court reasoned that the complaints were improperly admitted and that there was insufficient evidence of willful and wanton conduct by the defendants to support punitive damages.

torts & liability

This case involved a slip-and-fall incident in which plaintiff Nikki Herbst was injured when makeshift wooden boxes she used to descend from a University of Iowa stage moved out from under her. She sued the State of Iowa under the Iowa Tort Claims Act, alleging negligence in the University's failure to provide safe stage access. The district court instructed the jury only on a general negligence specification and the jury returned a verdict for the defendant; Herbst moved for a new trial, arguing the instructions omitted her specific theories of negligence. The Iowa Supreme Court held that the district court erred by failing to instruct on the distinct specifications of negligence supported by the evidence, including permitting use of makeshift stairs and failing to provide safe and secure access or unimpeded access to permanent stairs. The court therefore vacated the court of appeals decision, reversed the judgment, and remanded for a new trial.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case arose from a discovery dispute in a Florida RICO lawsuit by Exotica Botanicals against Du Pont over alleged damage from contaminated Benlate fungicide. Exotica sought to compel production of documents prepared by a consulting expert, which were in the possession of Terra International's general counsel and claimed as work product. The district court ordered production, concluding that the counsel's testimony in a prior unrelated case waived the work product privilege. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding that disclosure of only the general subject matter did not constitute waiver of the privilege, and additionally that the requesting party had not demonstrated the required substantial need and inability to obtain equivalent information elsewhere under Iowa civil procedure rules.

procedure

This case was a wrongful death action filed by Marc Dettmann, as executor of his wife Laurie's estate, after she was killed in a car accident caused by defendant Michael Kruckenberg, who was driving intoxicated. The suit named multiple defendants including Kruckenberg's father (owner of the car), a friend who stole beer with him, another friend who provided alcohol, and the beer truck driver and distributor for allegedly failing to secure the vehicle from which beer was stolen. After a jury trial, the district court directed a verdict for the beer truck defendants, entered judgment for compensatory damages against the Kruckenbergs, and addressed issues including issue preclusion from Kruckenberg's prior criminal vehicular homicide conviction regarding the identity of the driver. On appeal by the Kruckenbergs and cross-appeals by the plaintiff and defendant Jones, the Iowa Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed the district court's judgment.

criminal lawproceduretorts & liability

The case involved property owner Jim Kelley suing Story County and its sheriff after officers damaged two doors while forcibly entering a leased residence to execute an arrest warrant for a suspect believed to be inside. The district court ruled that the damage did not qualify as a constitutional taking under article I, section 18 of the Iowa Constitution and that the defendants were immune from tort liability under Iowa Code sections 670.4(3) and 670.12. On discretionary review, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that such damage from officers exercising reasonable force under Iowa Code section 804.15 constitutes tortious conduct rather than an exercise of eminent domain powers, so no compensation is required absent formal inverse condemnation proceedings. The court noted that Iowa's takings clause lacks explicit language covering mere damage, distinguishing it from some other states' constitutions, and that statutory immunity applies to the officers' due-care actions.

propertycriminal lawtorts & liabilitycivil rights

The case concerned when the limitations period begins to run for an insured's claim for underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits under an automobile insurance policy. The district court dismissed the Hamms' petition against Allied Mutual as time-barred, ruling that the two-year period started on the date of the accident. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, concluding that while the policy required the insureds to sue or settle with the tortfeasor within two years of the accident, it did not set the limitations period or starting point for a UIM claim against the insurer itself. As a result, the applicable ten-year statutory limitations period began to run only when Allied denied the UIM claim, and the Hamms' suit filed within that period was timely.

proceduretorts & liability

This case concerned the Mitchell County Board of Supervisors' approval of a rezoning application that would convert agricultural land to residential use for a subdivision, despite the Board's failure to publish notice or hold a required public hearing under Iowa Code sections 335.6 and 335.7. The Osage Conservation Club, which operates a nearby shooting range, petitioned for certiorari in district court to challenge the approval. The district court upheld the Board's action on the merits, but the court of appeals reversed, finding the noncompliance deprived the Board of subject matter jurisdiction. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals, holding that the statutory notice and hearing requirements are jurisdictional prerequisites for a zoning decision, rendering the Board's approval void and depriving the district court of authority to review its merits on certiorari. The case was remanded to the Board for new proceedings.

propertyprocedure

The case involved plaintiff Tom Teggatz seeking additional civil damages from his former employee Joseph Ringleb for money stolen from Teggatz's business, beyond the amount ordered as restitution in Ringleb's criminal theft case. The district court dismissed the civil petition, applying issue preclusion based on the criminal court's determination of damages. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding that under Iowa Code section 910.8, the restitution order does not bar relitigation of the full amount of damages in a subsequent civil action. The court reasoned that the statute expressly contemplates that restitution does not limit a victim's right to pursue civil remedies, and issue preclusion does not apply to prevent recovery of additional amounts.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Credit Bureau Enterprises seeking to collect a $2,775.79 hospital bill from Russell Pelo for mental health services provided during his five-day emergency involuntary hospitalization at a private Iowa facility in January 1995, after Pelo had refused to pay or authorize insurance payment. Pelo had been detained under Iowa Code chapter 229 emergency procedures based on probable cause of serious mental impairment and self-harm risk, but was released after a later hearing found insufficient grounds for continued commitment. The district court and Iowa Supreme Court ruled that Pelo was personally liable for the bill. The core reasoning was that Pelo received beneficial services under court order, creating liability under a quasi-contract or restitution theory to prevent unjust enrichment, reinforced by his eventual signing of the hospital release form acknowledging financial responsibility, with no due process violation since the commitment proceedings complied with statutory safeguards.

healthcarecivil rightsprocedure

This case concerns an employee's claim for liquidated damages and attorney fees under Iowa's Wage Payment Collection Law after a prior jury verdict established his employer's liability for unpaid wages over a twenty-year period, though limited by a two-year statute of limitations to $1,200. The district court denied liquidated damages on grounds that the nonpayment was not intentional and reduced the requested attorney fees from over $29,000 to $3,500, characterizing the case as simple, while also refusing to compel production of opposing counsel's billing records. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the denial of compelled discovery as within the trial court's discretion but reversed the fee reduction, holding that it lacked support in the record and failed to apply the statutory "usual and necessary" standard under Iowa Code section 91A.8, which requires consideration of factors beyond the judgment amount alone. The court remanded for a new hearing on trial and appellate attorney fees, noting that the employer's defense costs could be relevant to assessing reasonableness.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved a disciplinary complaint by the Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics and Conduct against attorney David A. Lemanski for his handling of a workers' compensation matter on behalf of client Michael Driscoll. The Board alleged that Lemanski neglected the client's case by missing deadlines, which led to the exclusion of key evidence and an initial denial of benefits; failed to promptly disburse or account for a $1,894.62 settlement check held in his trust account for over a year despite client requests; and did not respond to inquiries from ethics committees or the Board. The Iowa Supreme Court, reviewing the Grievance Commission's findings de novo, agreed that Lemanski violated multiple provisions of the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility, including rules against neglect of client matters, improper handling of client funds, and failure to cooperate with disciplinary investigations, and imposed a one-month suspension from the practice of law, considering factors such as a prior admonition for similar neglect.

procedure

The case involved Data Documents, Inc. suing Pottawattamie County for damages after an unincorporated association of Iowa county treasurers allegedly breached a contract for printing and distributing motor vehicle renewal notices. Data Documents claimed the county was jointly and severally liable as a member of the group. The district court entered judgment for the county after a bench trial. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that Data Documents failed to present sufficient evidence of damages under Iowa Code sections 554.2708 and 554.2709, such as market price, saved expenses, or profits from the contract, rendering the claimed losses too speculative.

business & regulatoryprocedure

Debra Gray, a registered nurse at St. Luke's Hospital, developed a latex allergy from workplace exposure, leading her to quit her position and file a workers' compensation claim for a work-related injury. The industrial commissioner awarded her benefits, finding she had contracted the allergy at work and suffered a 35% industrial disability under Iowa Code chapter 85. St. Luke's appealed, contending the claim should proceed under chapter 85A for occupational diseases rather than as an injury, and challenging the evidence of causation and the disability rating. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the award, ruling that St. Luke's had waived the chapter 85A argument by failing to raise it in prehearing proceedings and that substantial evidence supported the commissioner's determinations on causation and lost earning capacity.

labor & employment

The case involved a dispute between the Sergeant Bluff-Luton School District and the City of Sioux City over the city's 1994 decision to include the Virginia Meadows Addition residential development in an urban renewal project under Iowa Code chapter 403, enabling tax increment financing that diverted increased property tax revenues to the city and reduced them for the school district. The school district filed a certiorari petition in 1996 challenging the legality of the inclusion and resulting tax levies for the 1996-97 fiscal year. The district court sustained the writ and declared the levies illegal, but the Iowa Supreme Court reversed, ruling that the petition was untimely under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 307(c) because it was not filed within 30 days of the city's single 1994 decision, which was not a continuing act, and remanded with instructions to dismiss.

taxespropertyprocedure

In State v. Baehler, the defendant was charged with drug-related criminal offenses and assessed a tax under Iowa's drug tax statute for possessing illegal substances; he moved to dismiss the criminal case, arguing that the tax assessment constituted punishment that would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause if followed by a criminal prosecution and conviction. The trial court denied the motion, Baehler entered a guilty plea, and he appealed solely on the double jeopardy claim. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, declining to overrule its prior decision in State v. Lange, which held that Iowa's drug tax is not a criminal penalty for double jeopardy purposes. The court reasoned that decisions from other jurisdictions finding similar taxes punitive were distinguishable from Iowa's statute, and that the tax lacked the punitive characteristics identified in the U.S. Supreme Court's Kurth Ranch decision, such as being conditioned on a criminal arrest or levied on property no longer possessed.

criminal lawtaxes