Maurice E. Rawlings

This case involved the estate of Fred Duhme, who died testate with a will and codicils that specifically devised farms and other property to his son Raymond while providing smaller general legacies to his three daughters and dividing the residue among his six sons. The executor sought and the trial court granted proportional abatement of all beneficiaries' shares to cover federal estate taxes and other expenses, but the Iowa Supreme Court reversed that order. The court held that abatement must follow the default statutory sequence in Iowa Code § 633.436, which prioritizes non-specific and residuary devises over specific ones. It reasoned that § 633.437's exception for defeating the testator's plan did not apply because there was no clear and convincing evidence that Fred intended to equalize shares in the event of tax shortfalls, even though the will favored Raymond.

propertytaxes

The case involved a drainage district in Clay County seeking declaratory relief to require the City of Spencer and the Iowa DOT to pay assessments for the construction of culverts under highways and roads within city limits, as well as related area assessments. The trial court granted summary judgment to both defendants, dismissing the district's petition. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal as to the DOT, finding no statutory authority for assessments against it because the DOT lacked jurisdiction over the relevant highways at the time. The court reversed in part as to the City, holding that the district could pursue an area benefit assessment claim at one location where statutory authority existed, and remanded for further proceedings on that issue.

propertyprocedure

In Berger v. General United Group, Inc., stockholders of an Iowa insurance holding company filed a derivative action alleging that Wheelabrator-Frye acquired control of GUG by paying a premium to two officers for their stock that amounted to a commercial bribe violating Iowa Code § 741.1, along with breaches of fiduciary duty, and sought damages and restitution after the company was merged into successor entities. The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to make a demand on the board as required by rule 44 and because, under Iowa Code § 496A.74(2)(c) and Delaware law, the cause of action passed to the surviving corporation. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that the plaintiffs lacked standing since derivative rights transferred to the successor under the applicable merger statutes and the petition contained no allegations challenging the mergers or establishing plaintiffs' status in the surviving entity.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

In Knauss v. Kemin Industries, Inc., an employee sued his former employer for unpaid sales bonuses under an employment agreement, while the employer separately sought to enforce a non-compete covenant against the employee after he joined a competitor. The trial court ruled that the employer failed to prove modification of the agreement to eliminate the bonuses and that the new employer was not a competitor, denying the injunction. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court dismissed the non-compete claim as moot because the three-year restriction period had expired and affirmed the trial court's findings on the employment contract, holding that substantial evidence supported the conclusion of no contract modification and that the burden of proof was properly applied.

labor & employment

The case was a false arrest damages action brought by Terry Young against the City of Des Moines under Iowa's Governmental Subdivision Tort Claims Act after police arrested him without a warrant for public intoxication and the charges were later dismissed when officers failed to appear. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the judgment entered on the jury verdict for Young and also reversed on his cross-appeal. The court held that the trial court's jury instruction on lawful arrest was erroneous for failing to properly address the requirements of Iowa Code § 755.4(1) that an offense must actually have been committed or attempted in the officers' presence, and further held that punitive damages are not recoverable from a municipality.

criminal lawproceduretorts & liability

This case involved a challenge by Linn County officials and some taxpayers to the constitutionality of Iowa's amended procedures under Chapter 441 for implementing property tax equalization orders issued by the Department of Revenue. The plaintiffs claimed the new process, which shifted notice to county auditors and limited protests, violated due process and improper delegation of legislative power. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's dismissal, holding that the equalization function is legislative in nature, requiring only general notice rather than individualized hearings, and that adequate judicial review was available under the Administrative Procedure Act.

taxesprocedure

This case was a lawyer disciplinary proceeding against Lawrence B. Griffiths arising from his willful failure to file Iowa income tax returns for 1970-1973, resulting in a criminal conviction, a false statement on his annual bar questionnaire about filing a 1972 return, failure to timely file a 1975 federal tax return, and neglect of client matters involving title objections that led to a civil judgment against his clients. The Iowa Supreme Court, upon de novo review, decided to suspend Griffiths' license to practice law indefinitely with no possibility of reinstatement for two years from the date of his temporary suspension. The court reasoned that his tax violations breached Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(1), (4), (5) and (6) and Iowa Code sections 610.24(3) and (4), while his neglect violated Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) and section 610.24(3), making discipline appropriate under applicable professional standards.

criminal lawtaxes

This case arose from a certiorari proceeding challenging a district judge's rulings in a civil action for invasion of privacy and defamation against attorneys, which stemmed from news articles about a pending marriage dissolution case. The articles were based on information from one of the attorneys, and the plaintiff sought to depose the reporter and compel disclosure of her sources and notes. The district court denied the discovery motion, recognizing a qualified First Amendment newsperson's privilege and applying a multi-factor test that the plaintiff failed to satisfy, while also denying related sequestration requests. The Iowa Supreme Court sustained the writ, holding that the judge exceeded jurisdiction by not compelling discovery because the plaintiff had reasonably exhausted other sources, the information was necessary and not obtainable elsewhere, and the underlying suit was not facially frivolous.

free speechproceduretorts & liability

In State v. Ware, the defendant, a prison inmate, was convicted by a jury of carrying a concealed weapon in violation of Iowa Code § 695.2 after he produced a knife during a strip search. The Court of Appeals reversed the conviction, finding that a marshalling jury instruction failed to adequately instruct on the State's burden to prove intent to use the knife as an offensive or dangerous weapon. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the conviction, holding that the defendant had conceded the jury instruction error was not preserved for appellate review and that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. The majority reasoned that Iowa Code § 793.18 did not authorize review of unpreserved errors in this context, as the defendant received a fair trial without denial of substantial rights. A dissent argued that the statute required reversal because the incomplete instruction meant the jury never found an essential element of the crime.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a petition for dissolution of marriage filed in Iowa by Sharon Bouska less than one year after her return to the state, in violation of the statutory residency requirement under Iowa Code § 598.6. The trial court initially entered a default decree but later vacated it upon the respondent's motion, finding a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the one-year residency rule limits the court's special subject matter jurisdiction over the marriage itself and cannot be waived by consent, acceptance of service, or estoppel. The court reasoned that noncompliance with the statute deprives the court of power to adjudicate the dissolution, requiring the decree to be set aside whenever the jurisdictional defect is identified.

family lawprocedure

The case involved Chicago Title Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, challenging the Iowa Insurance Commissioner's denial of its application to sell title insurance in the state under Iowa Code Section 515.48(10), which bars corporations from insuring real estate titles. The company argued that the statute violated due process and equal protection under the U.S. and Iowa Constitutions, as well as other constitutional provisions. The trial court rejected these claims, and the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the law did not infringe on protected rights. The court reasoned that the legislature had a rational basis for the prohibition, given title insurance's distinct features—such as its focus on past events and single-premium structure—and concerns over potential abuses like rebates or ineffective market regulation in an oligopolistic industry.

business & regulatorycivil rights

In State v. King, the defendant appealed his first-degree murder conviction for allegedly hiring two men to kill his wife during a staged roadside incident in Des Moines, Iowa, in March 1975. The court affirmed the conviction after reviewing claims that the trial court erred in denying a new trial motion based on alleged judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, suppressing evidence from a New Mexico search warrant, omitting an accomplice-corroboration instruction, and permitting additional witness testimony. Key reasoning centered on the absence of any undisclosed promises or agreements by prosecutors to a cooperating witness in exchange for testimony, distinguishing the case from precedents like Giglio v. United States, along with findings that other evidentiary and procedural rulings were proper and supported by the record.

criminal lawprocedure

This case arose from a 1970 automobile collision in Iowa between two residents, after which the defendant moved to Nebraska. The plaintiff attempted to serve process on the nonresident defendant under Iowa Code sections 321.498-321.505 by filing notice with the public safety commissioner and mailing notification, but the original notice contained deviations from the statutory form regarding appearance details and the required proof of filing affidavit was not submitted until after the special appearance hearing. The defendant challenged personal jurisdiction via special appearance, and the trial court sustained it, finding that strict compliance with the service statutes was mandatory and the filings were deficient and untimely. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the statutory requirements for notice form and proof of service must be strictly followed to confer jurisdiction, with no proper cure of the defects. The dissent argued that the court should have allowed amendment of the return of service since actual service had occurred.

proceduretorts & liability

The case arose from a multi-vehicle collision on a rural gravel road in Iowa, where a deputy parked his patrol car near an earlier accident scene, and a subsequent driver lost control, causing injuries to plaintiff Susan Pieper. Plaintiffs sued the Harmeyers (driver and owner) under Iowa's guest statute for recklessness and intoxication, and sued the sheriff and deputy for negligence in parking the patrol car without adequate warnings. The trial court directed a verdict for the Harmeyers and the jury found for the officers; on appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the directed verdict for the Harmeyers because the evidence did not generate a jury question on recklessness and ordinary negligence was barred by the guest statute, but reversed the judgment for the officers and remanded for a new trial because the jury instructions on emergency-vehicle privileges failed to address when the emergency had ended. The court held that factual issues regarding the duration of the emergency and the applicability of any excuse doctrine should have been submitted to the jury.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a dispute between Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. and Cascade Telephone Co. over which company should install and maintain N2 carrier equipment for long distance connections in Cascade's central office. The Iowa State Commerce Commission ruled that Bell should provide the equipment and retained jurisdiction to set terms if the parties could not agree on space and power. The district court reversed the Commission's order, concluding it exceeded statutory authority under Code § 490A.11 and violated Cascade's property rights by ordering access to its premises. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that the Commission had authority to determine procedures for toll connections between utilities and to reserve jurisdiction for further proceedings on terms if negotiations failed.

business & regulatoryproperty

The case concerned Iowa statutes (Code §§ 238.26-238.28 and 600.3) governing voluntary termination of parental rights and adoptions by child-placement agencies, specifically whether they unconstitutionally permitted an unwed father's rights to be terminated without his consent or notice. The trial court ruled the statutes violated equal protection and due process under Stanley v. Illinois. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding the statutes constitutional because they were entitled to a presumption of validity, applied only when the father had not provided care for the child, and served the compelling interests of the mother, child, and adoption process; although the appeal became moot after the father consented, the court addressed the merits due to substantial public interest in the validity of existing and future adoptions.

family lawcivil rights

The case involved defendant David Keith Feddersen’s appeal from a jury conviction for raping Frieda Heim, who testified that he entered her apartment at night and assaulted her before she escaped and identified him to police. Feddersen challenged the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress the victim’s eyewitness identification as suggestive, the sufficiency of corroborating evidence, a juror’s visit to the crime scene, the refusal to give two requested jury instructions, and the denial of a new trial based on newly discovered witnesses. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, ruling that the pretrial suppression motion preserved error but the identification was admissible, that procedural defaults barred review of the instructions and new evidence claims, that the new evidence affidavits contained inadmissible hearsay and were cumulative, and that the defendant received a fair trial overall.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Menke, the defendant was charged with and convicted of delivery of a controlled substance (LSD) after an undercover officer purchased LSD at a farmhouse where the defendant was present. The defendant appealed on multiple grounds, including the admission of hearsay testimony from a witness who stated the drugs belonged to the defendant, limitations on cross-examination, and other trial errors. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding that the out-of-court statement was inadmissible hearsay because the record did not clearly show the defendant had assented to it as an adoptive admission. The court found no reversible error in the other issues raised, such as the scope of cross-examination or prosecutorial comments during voir dire.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a quiet title action by the Presbytery of Southeast Iowa against heirs of the original grantors, who claimed a reversionary interest in church property under a 1898 deed condition that the land would revert if services were permanently discontinued. The defendants had not filed the required notice of their interest under Iowa Code § 614.24 by the deadline. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment for the plaintiff, holding that the statute constitutionally extinguished the unrecorded reversionary interest as a valid exercise of legislative power to promote marketable titles, without violating due process or other constitutional protections. The majority reasoned that the act provided adequate opportunity for claimants to preserve their interests through recording.

propertyprocedurecivil rights

This case arose from a 1969 rear-end collision in which plaintiff DeWall, operating a tractor, was seriously injured by a truck driven by defendant Scheller and owned by defendant Prentice, both nonresidents of Iowa. DeWall filed suit in 1971, but service on the defendants occurred after the two-year statute of limitations had run under Iowa Code § 614.1(2), prompting a motion to dismiss that the trial court denied on grounds of equitable estoppel; the case then proceeded to a jury trial resulting in a verdict for the plaintiff. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the application of equitable estoppel to bar the limitations defense, as the sheriff's actions and related circumstances satisfied the doctrine's elements of representation, reliance, and prejudice. However, the court reversed in part and remanded, finding error in certain jury instructions on damages for loss of income, earning capacity, and family support, while upholding the jury's ability to award such damages based on the evidence of reduced farm income and work capacity presented at trial.

proceduretorts & liability