Mark S. Cady

The case involved a dispute over workers' compensation liability for the death of Justin Faur, a farm employee and volunteer firefighter who died from methane gas inhalation while attempting to rescue his employer from a manure pit. Grinnell Mutual, the insurer for the farm, sought contribution from Travelers Insurance, the insurer for the volunteer fire department, arguing that Faur was acting in his capacity as a volunteer firefighter at the time of his injury under Iowa Code section 85.61(7)(a). The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision that the fire department's insurer shared responsibility for the benefits, interpreting the statute to require that a volunteer firefighter acquire knowledge of a summons to duty before being considered in the course of employment. The core reasoning centered on the statutory language defining when a volunteer firefighter enters the course of employment upon being summoned, distinguishing it from the moment the dispatch occurs.

labor & employment

The case concerned whether an Iowa law enforcement officer could satisfy the statutory "written request" requirement for a breath test under the implied-consent law by displaying the request on a laptop computer screen to a driver arrested for operating while intoxicated. The district court suppressed the resulting breath-test evidence, ruling that the electronic display did not constitute a written request because no paper form was shown to the driver. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, concluding that a computer screen satisfies the requirement since the statute does not specify a paper format, the text was visible to the driver, and electronic documents qualify as writings consistent with legislative intent. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether a police officer's request for a breath specimen, displayed on a computer screen using an electronic form, satisfied the "written request" requirement under Iowa Code section 321J.6(1). After being arrested for suspected drunk driving, Jennifer Madison refused the test by marking "Refuse" on the touch screen but later moved to suppress evidence of the refusal, arguing she had not been given an opportunity to read the full text and that a screen did not qualify as writing. The district court denied the motion, convicted Madison of operating while intoxicated, and the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that the electronic request met the statutory requirement based on its analysis in the companion case State v. Fischer.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved the Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board charging attorney Larry J. Cohrt with violations of the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility for neglecting client matters in two separate lawsuits. In one case, Cohrt failed to file a required bond, ignored discovery requests, and dismissed the lawsuit without client authorization; in the other, he missed discovery deadlines leading to sanctions and dismissal. The court found that Cohrt violated the professional code through neglect and misrepresentation, considering his prior admonition and false statements as aggravating factors. It decided to impose an indefinite suspension of not less than three months, reasoning that multiple instances of neglect compounded by dishonesty warrant this sanction.

procedure

This case arose from a motor vehicle accident on Interstate 80 during a winter storm when one driver's disabled vehicle in the median contributed to a collision injuring passenger Martin Waters, who then sued the State of Iowa along with the drivers for negligence in failing to remove the obstruction, clear snow and ice, warn of hazards, and protect the public. The State moved for summary judgment on multiple grounds including lack of duty, discretionary function immunity under the Iowa Tort Claims Act, and insufficient notice. The district court granted summary judgment on some claims but entered a subsequent order directing the State to proceed to trial on others; the court of appeals affirmed that order, but the Iowa Supreme Court vacated the appellate decision and affirmed the district court, holding that the summary judgment ruling left remaining claims for trial based on its plain language and scope.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved allegations against Iowa attorney Jesse M. Marzen for violating professional conduct rules by having a sexual relationship with a client, misrepresenting facts to a judge, and disclosing confidential client information to the media. The Iowa Supreme Court, after de novo review, dismissed the charges of sexual misconduct and misrepresentation due to insufficient evidence but found that Marzen had improperly disclosed client confidences without consent. The court imposed an indefinite suspension of Marzen's license not to exceed six months, emphasizing the importance of maintaining client confidentiality in attorney-client relationships.

procedure

The case involved disciplinary charges against Iowa attorney Scott A. Sobel for his representation of two immigrant clients charged with multiple counts of illegal commercialization of wildlife. The Grievance Commission found multiple violations of the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility, including issues with joint representation, communication, and trust account procedures, and recommended a six-month suspension. On review, the Iowa Supreme Court determined that only the failure to provide written notice of fee withdrawals from the retainer violated DR 9-102(B)(3), while other claimed violations lacked sufficient supporting evidence, and imposed a public reprimand.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved an employee who suffered a work-related Achilles tendon injury while employed by Bell Brothers Heating & Air Conditioning and later sought workers' compensation benefits and payment for treatment by an unauthorized physician. The workers' compensation commissioner awarded benefits and ordered alternative medical care, decisions affirmed by the district court and court of appeals. On review, the Iowa Supreme Court vacated the court of appeals decision, reversed the district court, and remanded the case for further proceedings before the commissioner. The court focused on the statutory requirements under Iowa Code section 85.27 for an employee to establish entitlement to benefits for unauthorized care, emphasizing that the employer has the right to choose care and that the employee must provide sufficient proof of the necessity for alternative care or that the employer's offered care was inadequate.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case was a toxic-tort action in which plaintiff Bryan Ranes alleged that ingesting the prescription cough-and-cold medication Aquatab C, which contained phenylpropanolamine (PPA), caused him brain injury and a wide array of neurological and other symptoms. The district court excluded the causation opinion of Ranes’s expert witness as scientifically unreliable and entered summary judgment for the defendant manufacturers and distributors. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the expert’s methodology failed to meet the reliability standards for expert testimony under Daubert principles, because it did not reliably establish general causation between PPA and the claimed disorders or specific causation to Ranes’s condition via a valid differential diagnosis. The court emphasized that the expert’s conclusions lacked adequate scientific support and were therefore inadmissible.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a dispute over the enforceability of a contract modification in the sale of a weight-loss franchise business, where the original asset purchase agreement set a $125,000 price and a later addendum raised it to $155,000 with different payment terms. The sellers sued the buyer for breach after she stopped payments, and the district court granted summary judgment to the sellers on grounds that the addendum was supported by consideration, estoppel, and waiver, a ruling affirmed by the court of appeals. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding that the modification lacked consideration under the preexisting duty rule because the buyer provided no new promise or performance beyond her original obligation and the sellers identified no reciprocal new detriment or benefit. The court relied on established Iowa precedent requiring independent consideration for contract modifications to be enforceable.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case concerned whether Lonnie Muxfeldt, who was listed as a co-owner on the certificate of title for a used pickup truck solely to help his son obtain financing after a tax-motivated vehicle trade-in arrangement, could be held liable under Iowa’s owner responsibility statute for injuries caused by the son’s negligent driving. The district court granted summary judgment finding liability as a matter of law, and the court of appeals affirmed. On further review, the Iowa Supreme Court also affirmed, holding that the statute imposes consent-owner liability on all co-owners named on the title and contains no exemption for persons who acquire ownership only to facilitate financing. The court reasoned that the statutory exemption for sellers and transferors applies only in the context of completed sales or transfers and does not extend to co-ownership arrangements like the one at issue, leaving any broader exception to the legislature.

propertytorts & liability

The case involved investor Joseph Spreitzer's claim against Hawkeye State Bank for fraudulent misrepresentation arising from personal guaranties on loans to RJ Manufacturing, a company in which Spreitzer had invested substantial funds. The jury returned a verdict for Spreitzer on the fraud claim, leading the district court to enter judgment for compensatory damages while declining to submit punitive damages; the court of appeals reversed, finding insufficient evidence to support the fraud verdict. On further review, the Iowa Supreme Court concluded that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the amount of compensatory damages awarded but that a claim for punitive damages should have been submitted to the jury, resulting in reversal of the district court judgment and remand for a new trial limited to compensatory and punitive damages issues.

torts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

This case involved a dispute over prehearing discovery in a proceeding to terminate the teaching contract of John Gianforte by the College Community School District. Gianforte sought a broad subpoena duces tecum for documents from the superintendent and subpoenas plus interrogatories directed at school board members to explore potential bias. The district court enforced most of the document requests and required board members to answer an interrogatory about prior contacts with Gianforte. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding that the governing statute (Iowa Code § 279.16) does not authorize subpoenas for prehearing document production or allow interrogatories to board members, and that board members are generally immune from such discovery except through the recusal process on the record. The court remanded for the termination hearing to proceed without the additional discovery.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved owners of commercial real estate in Polk County who protested the county assessor's $4,179,000 tax valuation of their eight-acre parcel and building, claiming it should be reduced to $3.5 million after a major tenant left. The Polk County Board of Review denied the protest, the district court affirmed the assessment, and the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed on de novo review. The court held that the owners' witnesses did not follow the statutory valuation methods by ignoring available comparable sales in the broader Des Moines area and relying solely on an income approach, so the owners failed to meet their burden to prove overassessment under Iowa Code section 441.37.

taxesproperty

This case arose from a pedestrian's death in a car accident, where her estate first obtained a damages judgment against the driver and then sued her own insurer for underinsured motorist benefits. On remand after a prior appeal, the district court entered judgment against the insurer with an offset for medical payments and interest, and both parties appealed the calculations. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the judgment but remanded to modify the offset amount and interest award, holding that the insurer was bound by the prior damages determination while the medical payment offset was a contractual matter not subject to subrogation reductions under Iowa Code section 668.5(3) and that interest accrual should resume without improper suspension during the earlier appeal.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case concerned the State's petition to civilly commit Galen Shaffer as a sexually violent predator under Iowa's Sexually Violent Predator Act after he had served time for sexual abuse convictions. The district court dismissed the petition, finding Shaffer was not 'presently confined' because amendments to the earned-time statute had been improperly applied to extend his sentence in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause. On appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed, holding that Shaffer remained in state custody at the time the petition was filed and that the 'presently confined' requirement under Iowa Code section 229A.4 was satisfied, allowing the commitment proceedings to continue.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Cromer, the defendant was convicted of third-degree sexual abuse after a night of heavy drinking at a tavern involving the complainant N.S., who later alleged she was unable to consent to sexual activity at a motel due to intoxication. Cromer appealed, claiming errors including ineffective assistance of counsel for not objecting to admission of a police-orchestrated recorded phone call in which the complainant elicited incriminating statements from him. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding that trial counsel's failure to object to the audio recording amounted to ineffective assistance warranting relief. The court also clarified procedural rules on preserving alternative grounds for a new trial, such as insufficient evidence, under the law-of-the-case doctrine.

criminal lawprocedure

In Varnum v. Brien, twelve same-sex couples residing in Iowa challenged the state's marriage statute, which defined civil marriage as a union only between a man and a woman, after being denied marriage licenses by county officials. The plaintiffs argued the law violated their rights to equal protection and other liberties under the Iowa Constitution by denying them marriage benefits and imposing disadvantages related to healthcare decisions, taxes, adoption, and public recognition. The Iowa Supreme Court held that the statute violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution and affirmed the district court's summary judgment ruling in favor of the plaintiffs. The court reasoned that the classification based on sexual orientation lacked a substantial relation to the state's asserted interests in promoting procreation, optimal child-rearing, resource conservation, or traditional marriage, given that the couples otherwise satisfied all marriage requirements.

civil rightsfamily law

The case involved a wrongful discharge claim brought by Kimberly Jasper, who was fired from her position as director of a day-care center after repeatedly objecting to her employer's plans to reduce staff below levels required by state administrative regulations on staff-to-child ratios. The Iowa Supreme Court addressed issues of first impression, holding that administrative regulations can serve as a source of public policy supporting a tort claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, and that an individual corporate officer can be held liable for the tort. The court further held that emotional-distress damages awarded in this case were excessive and that punitive damages were not recoverable. It vacated the court of appeals decision, affirmed the district court in part, reversed in part on damages, and remanded for further proceedings including a conditional new trial.

labor & employmenttorts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

The case was a medical malpractice action brought by the estate and widow of a patient who died during surgery to repair abdominal aortic and iliac artery aneurysms, alleging that the surgeon negligently used sequential dilators rather than balloon angioplasty, causing a fatal rupture. The Supreme Court of Iowa held that the district court did not err in giving a supplemental jury instruction stating that the mere fact of an injury does not mean the doctor was negligent, and it affirmed the defense verdict. The court reasoned that this principle is a fundamental tenet of tort law, as recovery requires proof of duty, breach, and causation rather than injury alone, and the instruction aligned with the Iowa uniform jury instructions without improperly commenting on the evidence or the plaintiff's arguments about causation.

torts & liabilityhealthcareprocedure