2018 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J. (12 pages)

            Jimmy Stevens appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR), contending the district court erred in concluding retroactive application of Rhoades v. State, 848 N.W.2d 22 (Iowa 2014), is not required by the due process clause of the state constitution and the equal protection clauses of the federal and state constitutions.  Alternatively, he argues his PCR counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to urge retroactive application of Rhoades on nonconstitutional common law grounds.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Stevens was not denied due process or equal protection and PCR counsel was not ineffective as alleged.  We affirm the district court’s denial of Stevens’s PCR application. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Grundy County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  JUDGMENT AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART, AND CASE REMANDED FOR ENHANCEMENT HEARING, SENTENCING, AND JUDGMENT.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., Tabor, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J. (22 pages)

            Paul Knudsen challenges his convictions and sentences for three counts of sexual abuse in the third degree and one count of lascivious conduct with a minor.  Knudsen challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support one of his convictions for sexual abuse in the third degree, claims the court wrongly applied the rape-shield law to prevent the admission of evidence of prior allegations of sexual abuse made by the complaining witnesses, and maintains the court abused its discretion in preventing the defense’s expert from testifying that three-way sexual abuse involving the mother is rare.  He also maintains he did not knowingly and voluntarily enter into the stipulation that he was subject to the sentencing enhancements.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports Knudsen’s challenged conviction for sexual abuse in the third degree, the district court did not wrongly apply the rape-shield law to prevent the further introduction of evidence regarding prior sexual abuse perpetrated against A.M., and the district court did not abuse its discretion when it prevented the defense’s proposed expert from testifying how “rare” the type of sexual abuse described by A.M. occurs.  However, because we cannot say Knudsen entered into the prior-offense stipulation knowingly and voluntarily, we reverse the judgments and sentences of the district court.  On remand, Knudsen may enter into a new stipulation regarding the prior offense compliant with State v. Harrington, 893 N.W.2d 36, 45–47 (Iowa 2017), or may choose to proceed to trial to determine whether he meets the enhancement requirements.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monroe County, Randy S. DeGeest, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Danilson, C.J., and Doyle and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  Special Concurrence by Danilson, C.J.  (17 pages)

            The parties appeal and cross-appeal various provisions of their dissolution decree.  The wife also appeals the district court’s dismissal of her contempt action.  OPINION HOLDS: The parties’ premarital agreement is unenforceable because the wife did not have any appreciable time to seek counsel prior to signing and the husband failed to make a fair and reasonable financial disclosure.  The district court’s spousal support award was not proper because the present facts do not warrant any of the recognized categories of support.  The court’s determination that the husband’s premarital property was gifted or inherited was incorrect.  To do equity, the parties’ assets, including pre-martial, must be divided equally between the parties through a property equalization payment.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the wife only a portion of her requested attorney fees.  Because the wife failed to show the husband did not preserve assets, the district court properly dismissed her contempt action.  We remand to the district court to determine appellate attorney fees not to exceed $6000.00.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in the result; however, I part ways with the majority’s reasoning. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Richard B. Clogg, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Heard by Danilson, C.J., Doyle, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (26 pages)

            Stephen (Steve) Agan appeals and Julianne (Juli) Agan cross-appeals from various provisions of the decree dissolving their marriage.  Steve argues the dissolution court inequitably valued and divided the marital property.  Juli argues the court erred in valuing the pastureland.  Neither party challenges the distribution of property, rather both raise various issues to support their contention that the equalization award was inequitable.  Steve also requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the decree, we modify the dissolution decree to account for various gifted monies and conclude the equalization payment to Juli from Steve shall be in the amount of $80,000.  We do not award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED; WRIT ANNULLED.  Heard by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (17 pages)

            This appeal consolidates Thunder & Lightning, Inc.’s direct appeal of the order dismissing its trespass claims against the defendants and a certiorari action concerning an order awarding sanctions against Thunder & Lightning and its attorney for violating Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Because the defendants entered the leased premises without consent, Thunder & Lightning proved the defendants committed trespass.  Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal of its claims for trespass and conspiracy to commit trespass and remand to the district court to determine the amount of Thunder & Lightning’s damages.  II. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in sanctioning Thunder & Lightning and its attorney for violating rule 1.413 by failing to conduct a reasonable inquiry before initiating a contempt action, we annul the writ of certiorari.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (13 pages)

            Ashley Naylor challenges the property division and spousal support arising out of the dissolution of her marriage.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court’s property division and award of spousal support were equitable.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, John D. Ackerman, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  Dissent by McDonald, J.  (24 pages)

            Sharon and Larry Susie appeal the district court decision granting summary judgment to defendants in this medical malpractice action.  OPINION HOLDS: We determine the district court improperly granted summary judgment to defendants on the issue of negligence and the issue of lost chance of a cure.  Plaintiffs presented adequate expert testimony on a causal relationship between the defendants’ actions and the injury sustained.  We reverse the decision of the district court and remand for further proceedings.  DISSENT ASSERTS: The district court correctly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment.  The plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case of medical malpractice.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark D. Cleve, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Lauren Sherrick appeals from two evidentiary rulings made during her medical malpractice suit against Obstetrics & Gynecology Specialists, P.C.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no error in the district court’s exclusion of Dr. Abbey Hardy-Fairbanks’s improper expert opinion testimony, and no prejudice in the admission of Nurse Cindy Ramsay’s cumulative testimony, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (9 pages)

            Defendants appeal following a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff on her medical malpractice claim.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the plaintiff generated a fact question on causation and breach of the standard of care, the district court did not err in denying the defense motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on these elements.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, John D. Lloyd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  Special Concurrence by Vaitheswaran, J.  (19 pages)

            A jury found Richard Ryan Lamb Carson guilty of two counts of first-degree murder.  Carson appeals his convictions and sentence after the district court denied his motion for a mistrial.  He claims the prosecutor made multiple comments during closing arguments that denied him the right to a fair trial.  He further asserts his counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to the prosecutor’s questions during cross-examination.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the defendant was not prejudiced by the prosecutor’s comments.  Additionally, we preserve the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel for possible postconviction relief.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: While the prosecution’s statements, in my view, violated standards carefully laid out in State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2003), the strength of the State’s evidence was such that Carson cannot show prejudice.  Therefore, I agree he was not entitled to a new trial.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica L. Wittig, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; REVERSED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (11 pages)

            Both plaintiff, Eric Lucy, and defendants, Platinum Services, Inc. and Wayne Briggs, appeal the district court’s ruling on summary judgment regarding a contract dispute.  OPINION HOLDS: The two contracts at issue, one between Lucy and Platinum and another between Lucy and Briggs, do not incorporate each other.  Briggs may not cease payments upon Lucy’s breach of a non-compete covenant between Lucy and Platinum.  The term of the relevant non-compete covenant is two years.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART AND AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED IN PART ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (27 pages)

           Darren Bechthold appeals, and Angela Bechthold cross-appeals, a decree of dissolution of marriage.  Darren challenges the tax-liability, property-distribution, child-support, spousal-support, and attorney-fee provisions of the decree as inequitable.  Angela argues the awards of spousal support and attorney fees in her favor are inadequate, the district court’s consideration of new evidence in conjunction with Darren’s post-trial motions was improper, and Darren’s child-support obligation should be increased on appeal in light of new Iowa Court Rule 9.11A.  Angela seeks an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s decree, but modify it in several respects.  We modify the district court’s decree to provide Darren shall be responsible for sixty-one percent and Angela shall be responsible for thirty-nine percent of the parties’ tax liability resulting from the sale of farm assets for tax year 2016, with Angela’s share paid by a reduction in the equalization payment due from Darren.  We modify Darren’s equalization payment to Angela to $173,706.46, as reduced by her share of the tax liability.  We decline to increase the equalization payment upon Angela’s argument that Darren dissipated the assets of the marital estate by purchasing jewelry for his girlfriend.  We modify the decree by holding each party is entitled to substantially similar marital-share survivor benefits in one another’s pensions.  We affirm the spousal-support award in favor of Angela in the amount of $500.00 per month.  We modify the decretal child-support amounts to $1353.03 for three children, $1183.60 for two children, and $821.71 for one child.  We find Angela’s request that we increase Darren’s child-support obligation on appeal in light of new Iowa Court Rule 9.11A is not supported by substantial evidence and therefore deny the request.  We affirm the district court’s allocation of expenses in addition to child support for the child under shared physical care.  We affirm the district court’s award of trial attorney fees and deny Angela’s request for appellate attorney fees.  Costs on appeal are assessed equally between the parties.