Harvey Uhlenhopp

In Moser v. Stallings, a patient sued her plastic surgeon and his professional corporation for battery and negligence based on lack of informed consent after elective cosmetic surgery on her face, eyelids, forehead, and lip, claiming the results worsened her appearance with scars and other issues; she also alleged the surgeon deviated from consent by skipping a chin implant. The trial court directed a verdict against the battery claim and submitted only the negligence claim to the jury, which found for the defendant. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding there was no battery because the surgeon performed authorized procedures without substantially deviating from the consent form, which permitted necessary variations, and that any flaws in the informed consent instructions were not prejudicial when read as a whole with the other instructions.

torts & liabilityhealthcare

This case arose from the 1980 bankruptcy of Prairie Grain Company, where plaintiffs who had sold grain to or stored grain with the company sued Mt. Pleasant Bank & Trust Co. (later under FDIC receivership), claiming the bank conspired with Prairie Grain's manager to defraud customers by extending loans and other support that created a false appearance of financial stability, inducing continued dealings with the insolvent firm. The district court, after a bench trial on remand, entered judgment for the plaintiffs on the conspiracy-to-defraud claim. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that substantial evidence supported the trial court's findings of the bank's statutory violations and deviations from sound banking practices, such as facilitating overdrafts and improper handling of warehouse receipts, which showed the bank's knowing participation in sustaining the grain company for its own benefit. Review was deferential, limited to whether the facts, viewed favorably to the judgment, established an agreement to accomplish the fraud.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

This case is a lawyer disciplinary proceeding against attorney George West arising from his involvement in acquiring, managing, and selling real estate that included an office building. The Iowa Supreme Court found that West committed ethical violations by forging his relatives' signatures on a deed transferring interest in the property and having his secretary falsely acknowledge the conveyance in violation of state notary statutes. The court agreed with the Grievance Commission's findings on these misconduct issues but rejected claims of conflict of interest or improper actions to clear title from his associate's creditors due to insufficient evidence. It suspended West's law license for one year, concluding that the proven dishonest and illegal acts warranted discipline even without proof of personal gain or harm to others.

criminal lawpropertyprocedure

The case concerned Kalonji Saadiq's conviction for possessing a firearm as a felon under Iowa Code section 724.26, which was based on his prior guilty plea to third-degree theft, an aggravated misdemeanor carrying a maximum two-year sentence. Saadiq challenged the conviction through postconviction relief and on appeal, arguing the theft was not a felony, and also raised an issue regarding the prosecutor's peremptory strike of a Black prospective juror at trial. The court held that the specific definition of felony in section 724.25, covering any offense punishable by more than one year of imprisonment, controlled over general felony classifications and applied here because the theft sentence exceeded one year. On the jury selection claim, the court applied Batson v. Kentucky and remanded for a hearing to determine whether the strike was motivated by purposeful racial discrimination, directing further proceedings based on the outcome.

criminal lawcivil rightsguns

The case concerned the timing requirements under the Iowa civil rights act for filing a district court action after the Civil Rights Commission issues a right-to-sue release. Plaintiff Saemisch filed an employment discrimination complaint, received a release letter mailed by the commission on December 7, 1984, and sued on March 11, 1985—ninety-four days after mailing but within ninety days of receipt. The court interpreted the statute and commission rules, which define "issuance" as mailing by certified mail, to mean that the ninety-day period begins on the date of certified mailing. Because the record did not establish whether certified mail was used, the defendant bore the burden of proof on the limitations defense and had not met it. The court reversed the dismissal of the discrimination claim and remanded for further proceedings, while noting the contract claim was improperly dismissed.

civil rightsprocedurelabor & employment

This case arose from a December 1981 traffic collision on a snow-covered Iowa highway in which plaintiff Leo Jones was injured when defendant Robert Blair's vehicle slid into the Jones car during a left turn; Jones and his wife sued Blair for negligence under several traffic statutes and common-law duties, joined his employer under respondeat superior, and faced a counterclaim from the Blairs for vehicle damage. After a jury found neither driver negligent, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial between the Joneses and Blairs because the trial court gave an erroneous jury instruction on legal excuse that allowed the jury to excuse statutory violations without proper factual predicate. The court affirmed dismissal of claims against the employer, holding that Blair was not acting within the scope of employment while driving home the day after the job ended, as mileage reimbursement alone did not give the employer control over his travel. The cross-appeal was affirmed without discussion.

torts & liabilityprocedurelabor & employment

This case involved a challenge by defendant Edward Harrison Bousman to the validity of a search warrant used in connection with investigations of home burglaries in Clinton, Iowa, by members of the Bousman family and an associate. The police obtained a warrant to search the defendant's car based on an affidavit detailing information from family members about past burglaries and a planned trip to sell stolen goods in Las Vegas using the defendant's vehicle. The Iowa Supreme Court upheld the warrant, holding that the affidavit provided sufficient probable cause when viewed in a common-sense manner, and affirmed the conviction. The court did not address subsequent legal developments regarding good-faith reliance on warrants or statutory changes, as the warrant was found valid.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved Gateway State Bank seeking coverage under a banker's blanket bond issued by North River Insurance Company for losses on three loans made to a borrower who provided false information about ownership and liens on pledged construction equipment. The district court granted summary judgment to the bank, but the Iowa Supreme Court reversed and directed judgment for the insurer. The court interpreted the bond's Clause B (on-premises coverage) and Clause E (forgery and counterfeit coverage) according to their defined terms, concluding that the borrower's signed documents were neither forgeries nor counterfeit imitations, so the losses fell outside the policy. The decision rested on standard principles of insurance contract construction that require unambiguous policy language to control without straining terms to create unintended coverage.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved Thorp Credit foreclosing on a mortgage that secured a loan to Dorothy Gott and her son Melvin on approximately sixty acres of farmland after they defaulted. A dispute arose over whether the home on the property was included in the mortgage, as well as related issues concerning alleged fraud by Thorp officers, the interest rate in the note, legal descriptions, and the amount owed. The trial court granted partial summary judgment ordering foreclosure and sale of all land except the home tract. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed and remanded, ruling that genuine issues of material fact existed on fraud and other matters, making partial summary judgment improper because it would not resolve legal issues, risked piecemeal litigation, and left key details like redemption amounts undetermined.

propertyprocedure

This case arose from a construction dispute over a low-rent housing project in Des Moines involving the Low Rent Housing Agency and contractor Andersen, centered on whether Andersen was required to build a retaining wall and on Andersen's later claim for retainage payments plus consequential damages from delayed final payment. After the parties signed a settlement agreement under which Andersen would build the wall in exchange for an extra $12,000, Andersen failed to perform and instead sued, arguing the agreement was void due to economic duress. The district court ruled for Andersen, but the Iowa Supreme Court reviewed the matter de novo as an equity case and held that the settlement agreement was enforceable because Andersen had reasonable alternatives to signing it, had already accepted its benefits, and could not establish the coercive conduct required for duress. The court therefore reversed the award of consequential damages to Andersen while affirming the portion of the judgment requiring payment for remaining punch-list items, and remanded for entry of judgment consistent with that ruling.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

The case involved plaintiff Robert Willson suing the City of Des Moines and two police officers under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 for alleged violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights during the application for and execution of a search warrant at his home and business, along with related state tort claims including false light invasion of privacy and conversion. A jury awarded Willson damages on the section 1983 claims for material misrepresentations in obtaining the warrant and exceeding its scope during execution, as well as on the conversion claim, but the trial court directed a verdict for defendants on punitive damages and the invasion of privacy claim. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the liability findings and actual damages under section 1983 and conversion while upholding the directed verdicts, reasoning that Iowa Code chapter 613A provided an adequate post-deprivation remedy that precluded certain due process claims under Parratt v. Taylor, but did not bar the substantive constitutional violations found by the jury.

civil rightscriminal lawtorts & liability

The case involved Robert Ray Mills, who was charged with false use of a financial instrument after presenting a check made out to a fictitious name in exchange for traveler's checks at a bank. At a bench trial, the judge questioned Mills to clarify whether he had filled in the payee name on the check while the banker verified it, which established that the check was not bearer paper. Mills was convicted, and he later claimed in postconviction proceedings that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the judge's interrogation under Iowa Rule of Evidence 614(b). The Iowa Supreme Court held that the judge's questions were proper because they were asked in the interest of justice to resolve an unclear factual issue central to the charge, and counsel therefore was not incompetent for not objecting. The court vacated the court of appeals decision and affirmed the conviction.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a nonprofit rural water system's claim for a refund of Iowa sales tax paid on electricity used in its water treatment and distribution operations, based on a statutory exemption for electricity consumed in processing tangible personal property. The Iowa Department of Revenue allowed the exemption only for certain intermediate treatment steps and denied it for initial pumping, post-chlorination holding, and final distribution to towers and customers, a position upheld by both the district court and the Iowa Supreme Court. The court applied a strict construction of the tax exemption statute and related agency rules, concluding that processing ends once the water is fully treated and that subsequent activities constitute preservation and delivery rather than processing. It rejected the taxpayer's all-or-nothing refund request after finding that only a minimal portion of electricity qualified and that the taxpayer had not separately proven the exempt amount.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

In State v. Jackson, the case centered on whether child abuse information from a department of human services investigation could be used to support a criminal assault charge against a daycare operator. The district court suppressed the evidence, holding that confidentiality rules under Iowa Code § 235A.15 barred its use in any criminal prosecution. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, ruling that the county attorney had obtained the report directly from the department as required by statute, not through the registry itself, so the prohibition on registry-sourced data did not apply. The court reasoned that related provisions in chapters 232 and 235A authorize cooperation between the department and county attorney and explicitly contemplate criminal proceedings arising from child abuse reports.

criminal lawfamily lawprocedure

The case involved a petition in an Iowa district court to enforce support arrearages and future obligations under a Canadian divorce decree against a respondent who had relocated to Iowa after the Canadian proceedings. The district court entered judgment for arrearages based on the Canadian award and imposed a modified continuing support obligation that differed from the foreign decree. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the arrearages judgment as modified to credit certain payments made by the respondent, but reversed the modification of future support, holding that the trial court lacked authority to alter the Canadian obligations. The court reasoned that comity permits enforcement of foreign judgments not incompatible with state public policy, and that altering the foreign support award required evidence of how a Canadian court would treat such a bifurcation and increase.

family lawprocedure

In this case, parents sued a landlord who had sexually abused their minor children, seeking recovery for medical expenses related to the children's injuries and for the parents' own severe emotional distress after learning of the abuse. The children had settled their claims, and the defendant moved for summary judgment on the parents' claims. The court held that the parents could pursue their Rule 8 claims for expenses incurred on behalf of the children because the pleadings sufficiently alleged such damages under notice pleading standards. However, the court affirmed dismissal of the emotional distress claims because the tort requires the plaintiff to have been present during the underlying incidents, a requirement not met here as the parents learned of the abuse later from authorities.

torts & liabilityfamily law

This case involved two farmers in a dispute over hay sold by the Bennetts to the Dottses, which allegedly contained mycotoxins that sickened and killed the buyers' cattle. The buyers sued for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability under Iowa Code section 554.2314, which requires the sellers to qualify as merchants dealing in goods of that kind. A jury returned a verdict for the Dottses, but the Iowa Supreme Court reversed and remanded, ruling that the trial court's jury instruction on the statutory definition of merchant was inadequate because it did not sufficiently explain that the term 'deals' refers to a regular course of business rather than casual or occasional sales, despite the sellers' timely request for a clarifying instruction. The court held that this instructional error required reversal even though other issues, such as fitness for a particular purpose, were resolved in the sellers' favor.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

The case involves Steven Ray Wycoff's post-conviction relief petition following his 1975 conviction for first-degree murder of a fellow inmate. Wycoff alleged multiple instances of prosecutorial misconduct during trial, such as improper cross-examination and use of unsupported testimony, along with claims of ineffective assistance by his trial and appellate counsel for failing to object or raise issues. The Iowa Supreme Court, on further review, vacated the court of appeals' reversal and affirmed the district court's denial of relief. The court reasoned that many claims had been litigated on direct appeal or lacked sufficient prejudice, that counsel's performance met the standard of normal competency under the totality of circumstances, and that the state's evidence of guilt was strong.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a contempt proceeding arising from a divorce dissolution decree that granted joint custody of two children to the parents with the mother having physical custody and the father liberal visitation rights. After the mother moved with the children to Texas, the father sought to hold her in contempt for violating the visitation provisions and also sought modification of the decree. The district court found the mother in contempt based on clear and convincing evidence, sentenced her to fourteen days in jail, and modified the visitation schedule to compensate the father. On certiorari review, the Iowa Supreme Court sustained the writ, holding that due process requires proof of contempt beyond a reasonable doubt when punitive sanctions such as jail are imposed, and that Iowa Code section 598.23 permits either a jail sentence or modification of the decree but not both in the same contempt order.

family lawcriminal lawprocedure

This case involved grain producers who sued the State of Iowa for financial losses after a licensed grain elevator failed due to inventory shortages and underreporting. The plaintiffs claimed the Iowa State Commerce Commission was negligent in its licensing, inspections, and rule-making under Iowa Code chapters 542 and 543, which are intended to protect grain producers. The Iowa Supreme Court held that plaintiffs could not recover under chapter 543 at all and could not recover for post-June 30, 1978 losses under chapter 542, but remanded for findings on any pre-July 1, 1978 losses proximately caused by the Commission's negligence under chapter 542. The court upheld the trial court's findings of negligence and causation for the relevant period based on evidence of inadequate inspection procedures that failed to detect underreporting. It also affirmed the method of deducting recoveries from other sources from the principal damages.

business & regulatorytorts & liabilityprocedure