Linda R. Reade

Hanrahan v. Roberts (In Re Roberts)

District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2011-05-05 · cited 2×

This case is an appeal from a U.S. Bankruptcy Court ruling allowing debtor Doylene K. Roberts to claim a homestead exemption on a California property (the Newport Beach Property) under Iowa law in her Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing. The trustee argued that the exemption was unavailable because Iowa's homestead exemption lacks extraterritorial effect and because the debtor had abandoned the property after leaving it in 2004 amid marital issues, moving to Iowa, and at times expressing intent to sell. The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision, holding that Iowa's homestead exemption applies to out-of-state property in federal bankruptcy proceedings and that the debtor had not abandoned the homestead under Iowa law given the involuntary nature of her departure and her ongoing intent to return. The court rejected the trustee's reliance on cases like Sipka and distinguished Rogers, while noting that practical barriers to return did not equate to abandonment.

propertyprocedure

United States v. Davis

District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2011-03-16

In United States v. Davis, the defendant faced a 2010 indictment charging conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base and money laundering, based on conduct from 1997 to 2006. He moved to strike the 50-gram quantity as surplusage after the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 raised the threshold for mandatory minimums to 280 grams. The court denied the motion, holding that the FSA does not apply retroactively to criminal conduct predating its August 2010 enactment. The decision relied on the Federal Savings Statute, which preserves penalties under repealed laws absent express contrary intent, along with Seventh and Second Circuit rulings that the relevant date is the offense conduct rather than sentencing or indictment, even in pipeline cases. The court therefore applied pre-FSA mandatory minimums if the defendant were convicted.

criminal lawprocedure

Reeder v. Carroll

District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2010-12-21 · cited 3×

This case involved a lawsuit by Dr. Ralph Reeder against Dr. Thomas Carroll for slander, libel, false light invasion of privacy, and civil conspiracy, arising from a letter Dr. Carroll sent to the Iowa Board of Medicine regarding concerns about Dr. Reeder's medical practice. The court granted Dr. Carroll's motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims. The core reasoning was that Dr. Carroll was protected by statutory immunity under Iowa law for reports to the medical board and by qualified privilege, and there was no evidence of actual malice to overcome those protections.

torts & liabilityhealthcare

PSK, LLC v. Hicklin

District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2010-12-02 · cited 1×

The case involved a dispute between PSK, LLC, which operates an Overhead Door franchise selling and servicing garage doors in Iowa, and the Hicklins, who run competing garage door businesses using the term 'overhead' in their advertisements and names. PSK sued under the Lanham Act for service mark infringement, unfair competition through passing off and false advertising, as well as related state law claims, alleging that the Hicklins' use of 'overhead' caused customer confusion. The court granted the Hicklins' motion for summary judgment, holding that 'overhead' is a generic term that cannot function as a protectable trademark. It further found no secondary meaning in the mark, no likelihood of confusion based on the multi-factor test, and insufficient evidence to support the unfair competition or false advertising claims.

business & regulatory

United States v. Rubashkin

District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2010-06-21 · cited 6×

Neessen v. Arona Corp.

District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2010-04-30 · cited 1×

Affiliations

Decision record

Linda R. Reade

Affiliations

Decision record