January 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Dale E. Ruigh, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Bower, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Steve Schneider appeals the district court decision denying his request for postconviction relief from his convictions of six counts of third-degree sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Schneider has not shown he received ineffective assistance of counsel during his criminal trial.  We affirm the district court’s decision denying his request for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, James B. Malloy, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (4 pages)

            Michelle Swenson appeals her conviction for possession of methamphetamine, second offense, arguing the district court improperly denied her motion to suppress evidence uncovered during a warrantless search of her purse.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of Swenson’s suppression motion and her “verdict and sentence” for possession of methamphetamine, second offense.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Duane E. Hoffmeyer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., McDonald, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (16 pages)

            Defendant Hanslip appeals his convictions of being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of an offensive weapon.  He contends the trial court erred in admission of claimed hearsay and in denial of his attorney’s motion to withdraw from representation due to a conflict.  OPINION HOLDS: (1) Trial court properly overruled defense counsel’s hearsay objection since the evidence was properly admitted under the excited utterance exception; and (2) trial court properly denied the defense counsel’s motion to withdraw following a hearing, when it removed attorney from same public defender office from representing a State’s witness in an unrelated case.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Heard by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (30 pages)

            Thomas Dunlap appeals the dismissal of his civil suit against his former employer’s workers’ compensation insurance carrier following the district court’s grant of summary judgment in the insurers’ favor.  OPINION HOLDS:  Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s ruling in all respects but one.  The district court erred in finding the defendants were entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law on Dunlap’s 2012 injury claim because a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether the defendants’ reliance upon Dr. Wolfe’s subsequent opinion was reasonable.  Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Dunlap, a reasonable fact-finder could find that the defendants’ reliance was simply not reasonable once they were aware three other experts had opined a causal connection existed between Dunlap’s established 2007 work injury and his later injuries and Dr. Wolfe clarified his opinion with a condition that could change his opinion from possible causation to probable causation.  Because a fact question exists as to whether the defendants’ reliance was reasonable, the claim was not fairly debatable as a matter of law.  Consequently, we reverse the district court’s ruling in that regard and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.  We do not retain jurisdiction, and any costs are assessed to the defendants.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (17 pages)

            Pella Corporation (Pella) appeals from the district court’s ruling affirming the decision of the Iowa workers’ compensation commissioner awarding benefits to Diana Winn.  Pella argues Winn’s petition for review-reopening was untimely and she was not entitled to permanent total disability benefits or penalty benefits.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the agency did not erroneously interpret the law, including our supreme court’s precedent; the review-reopening proceeding and the award of total permanent disability benefits have factual support; and the penalty benefits are authorized because Pella did not concurrently convey a reasonable basis to deny disability benefits.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William P. Kelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  Special Concurrence by Vaitheswaran, J.  (8 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals the grant of summary judgment on her claim the Iowa Board of Regents and five of its members violated the Iowa Open Meetings Act (IOMA).  OPINION HOLDS: There was no genuine issue of material fact, and no meeting within the meaning of the IOMA took place.  Because no meeting took place, IOMA was not violated and the grant of summary judgment was correct.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: In my view, the Iowa Supreme Court has recognized that serial submajority gatherings of public bodies may violate the Iowa Open Meetings Law.  I agree, however, that the gatherings in this case did not violate the Iowa Open Meetings Law.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Wittig, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Lynette Heims appeals from the district court’s order terminating Brad Heims’s spousal support obligation and modifying the child-support order from their 2014 Illinois dissolution of marriage decree.  She argues a substantial change in circumstances has not occurred, continuing the spousal and child support orders is equitable, and the district court should have awarded her attorney fees.  Both parties request appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the court’s termination of spousal support and modification of child support.  We also find no decision on trial attorney fees to review, and we decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (2 pages)

            John Mitchell appeals the summary dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Mitchell’s application in this action was filed nearly thirteen years after issuance of procedendo, which is well beyond the statute of limitations.  No disputed issue of fact would bring Mitchell’s claim within that limitation.  Summary dismissal was proper.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey D. Farrell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  Special Concurrence by Vaitheswaran, J.  (5 pages)

            The estate of Fanchon Jeffries appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in the appellee’s favor.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court was correct in granting summary judgment as to both breach of contract claims.  The estate failed to present the unjust enrichment claim in the district court and cannot assert the claim on appeal.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I would conclude error was not preserved on a challenge to the merits, and I would affirm on statute-of-limitations grounds alone.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Louisa County, Michael J. Schilling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Potterfield, J., Doyle, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (12 pages)

            Michael Cupps contends the district court erred in granting summary judgment because the employment application he signed is not a contract.  Alternatively, Cupps contends the exculpatory clause contained in the application is invalid because it does not certainly and unequivocally state the signer is waiving claims for negligence, or, even if the exculpatory clause is valid, Cupps’s injury was not a “work-related injury” within the meaning of the contract.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude a binding contract existed between the parties, the exculpatory clause clearly and unequivocally alerts the casual reader the signer is waiving any claim for damage, and the injury was work-related, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karen A. Romano, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Robin Inman appeals from her conviction for burglary in the first degree.  She maintains there is insufficient evidence to support her conviction, arguing there was not substantial evidence to support the jury’s finding (1) she had the intent to commit an assault or theft at the time she entered the occupied structure or (2) she inflicted bodily injury while “in or upon” the occupied structure.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that Inman entered the home with the intent to commit a theft, we affirm Inman’s conviction for burglary in the first degree.  Her claim there was insufficient evidence to support a finding she committed an assault “in or upon” the structure is not preserved for our review, and we cannot consider her alternative ineffective-assistance claim; we preserve it for a postconviction-relief action.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey D. Farrell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (4 pages)

            Jaysen McCleary appeals the dismissal of an application for contempt.  OPINION HOLDS: McCleary failed to meet the requirements for holding nonparties to a protective order in contempt for violating the order.  Because the district court properly dismissed McCleary’s application, we affirm.