Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-0803
View Summary for Case No. 17-0803
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Paul L. Macek, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (6 pages)
Jackie Spitzmiller appeals the spousal support provision of the decree dissolving her marriage, claiming the district court should not have reduced its initial award to her following its grant of Scott Spitzmiller’s motion for enlarged findings. Scott cross-appeals, challenging the property equalization payment order. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm as modified on appeal; we affirm on cross-appeal.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-0839
View Summary for Case No. 17-0839
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, James M. Richardson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (10 pages)
Colby Puckett appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief. OPINION HOLDS: Because Puckett’s plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered, and he has failed meet his burden to show plea counsel was ineffective, the district court did not err in denying his application.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-0889
View Summary for Case No. 17-0889
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Heard by Danilson, C.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. Special concurrence by McDonald, J. Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Mullins, J. (50 pages)
Max Hansen appeals, and Karin Hansen cross-appeals from the district court’s decree dissolving their marriage. Max asserts the district court’s award of spousal support is inappropriate in this case. Max also challenges the court’s order he pay a portion of Karin’s trial-attorney fees. Karin contends the district court should have ordered a greater spousal-support award. Karin also argues the district court improperly determined the parties’ most recent postnuptial agreement controlled the division of assets, and erred in not awarding her a share of the equity in Max’s Davenport residence. Karin requests attorney fees on appeal. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude there is no reason to disturb the district court’s property distribution, and the district court properly awarded Karin trial-attorney fees. However, we also conclude the district court’s spousal support award was inequitable and modify the spousal-support award. We deny Karin’s request for appellate-attorney fees. SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in the property division as equitable and concur in the spousal support award because Max conceded he was willing to pay spousal support at oral argument. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I dissent from the modification of the permanent alimony to Karin as inequitable in light of the award to Max of 100% of the roughly $9.6 million, 250% increase in the value of his premarital property and netting him $15.7 million after this eight-year marriage.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-0971
View Summary for Case No. 17-0971
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Christopher Foy, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (8 pages)
Plaintiff appeals the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment in favor of defendants on a medical malpractice action. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in striking the plaintiff’s expert witnesses and the district court did not err in granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1149
View Summary for Case No. 17-1149
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Michael J. Moon, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ. Opinion by Doyle, J. (16 pages)
Ames 2304, LLC appeals the district court order annulling its writ of certiorari. It contends the Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment acted illegally in denying it a permit for its proposed remodeling plan by incorrectly applying the law in interpreting the zoning ordinance concerning nonconforming use. It also contends substantial evidence does not support the Board’s finding that the plan would increase the intensity of the nonconforming use. OPINION HOLD: The municipal ordinance’s definition of “intensity” does not apply to residential uses. However, limiting the application of the “increase in intensity” test to just enlargements, expansions, or extensions of nonconforming uses would be contrary to the purposes of the zoning ordinance. Looking elsewhere in the ordinance for a definition of intensity to apply to residential uses, the only instance we could find ties intensity to the number of dwelling units. Because the proposed remodel does not increase the number of dwelling units, it would not increase the intensity of the nonconforming use. In relying on its erroneous interpretation of the zoning ordinance, the Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment acted illegally in denying Ames 2304 a permit for its proposed interior remodel. We reverse the district court order annulling the writ of certiorari and remand to the district court for entry of an order sustaining the writ.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1336
View Summary for Case No. 17-1336
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica L. Wittig, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, P.J., Tabor, J., and Mahan, S.J. Opinion by Vogel, P.J. (9 pages)
Sean Hilliard appeals his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree. Through his appellate counsel, he argues his trial counsel was ineffective on several grounds. In a pro se brief, he also argues his jury was not drawn from a fair cross-section of the community and the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. OPINION HOLDS: We find the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction, he did not preserve his jury-composition argument, and we cannot evaluate his ineffective-assistance claims on the record before us. Therefore, we affirm his conviction and preserve his ineffective-assistance claims for potential postconviction proceedings.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1349
View Summary for Case No. 17-1349
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clayton County, John J. Bauercamper, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Mullins, J. (9 pages)
Appellants appeal a district court decree granting foreclosure of mortgages on farm property in favor of Farmers Savings Bank. OPINION HOLDS: Having reviewed de novo the issues properly presented on appeal, we affirm the outcome of the district court proceedings.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1365
View Summary for Case No. 17-1365
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (3 pages)
Alan Nigel Archibald Jr. appeals from his convictions following bench trial for multiple offenses. On appeal, Archibald argues that the district court erred when it denied his motion for a new trial because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Archibald’s motion for a new trial, we affirm.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1410
View Summary for Case No. 17-1410
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by McDonald, J. (8 pages)
Patricia Haidar appeals the entry of default judgment in her dissolution proceeding. OPINION HOLDS: The entry of default judgement was not proper because Patricia's counsel was present for trial and prepared to proceed without Patricia's physical presence, and Patricia's presence was not reasonably necessary to resolve the disputes at issue. The portion of the judgment dissolving the marriage is affirmed, and the remainder is vacated and remanded to the district court for substantive consideration.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1528
View Summary for Case No. 17-1528
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (15 pages)
Nancy Hoffman appeals her conviction and sentence following her guilty plea to operating while under the influence (OWI), second offense. Her appeal was consolidated with her appeal of the revocation of her probation and deferred judgment from a prior conviction. Hoffman asserts the court erred in accepting her guilty plea, in sentencing her, and in finding a probation violation had occurred. Hoffman also asserts her trial counsel was ineffective in allowing her to plead guilty to OWI, second offense, without a factual basis and because her plea was not given knowingly, voluntarily, or intelligently. OPINION HOLDS: Because there was a factual basis for Hoffman’s guilty plea to OWI, second offense, counsel was not ineffective in that regard. Because Hoffman stipulated she violated the terms of probation, the court did not err in revoking her probation and deferred judgment. We affirm Hoffman’s conviction, revocation, and sentences. Because the record is inadequate to address Hoffman’s other ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims, we preserve those claims for potential postconviction-relief proceedings.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1551
View Summary for Case No. 17-1551
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Mary Pat Gunderson, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART ON CROSS-APPEAL; AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (14 pages)
Seth Aldini appeals and Bianca Brashear cross-appeals from the order modifying their custody and support decree. OPINION HOLDS: On appeal, we affirm as modified the visitation terms—modifying the weekend, Wednesday night, holiday and child’s birthday visitation terms. On the cross-appeal, we reverse the denial of retroactive application of the increased child support and affirm on all other issues. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Filed Oct 10, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1557
View Summary for Case No. 17-1557
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (7 pages)
Jason Brown appeals from the summary adjudication of his second application for postconviction relief, contending the district court erred in dismissing the claim as time barred. OPINION HOLDS: Because Brown has not shown he could not have raised the issue earlier or sufficient reason to avoid the three-year bar, we affirm.