August 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (4 pages)

            Suzanne Billeter appeals the district court’s denial of her petition to modify the decree dissolving her marriage to Brian Pierce.  She argues the court erred in: (1) not finding a substantial and material change in circumstance to modify custody and physical care, (2) finding a substantial change in circumstance to modify child support, and (3) not granting a new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the court’s modification ruling and the denial of Suzanne’s request for a new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, James S. Heckerman, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            Harold Widdison appeals various district court orders in the ongoing litigation following the dissolution of his marriage to Amy Widdison (now Amy Dendy).  OPINION HOLDS: Harold is not entitled to reimbursement of fees or costs incurred when the Iowa Child Support Recovery Unit seized funds from his retirement account.  We affirm the district court’s award of Amy’s attorney fees and denial of Harold’s motion for sanctions.  We remand to the district court to determine the amount of Amy’s appellate attorney fee award. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Union County, Dustria A. Relph, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (12 pages)

            Jessie Carter appeals the district court’s decree dissolving her marriage to Jared Carter.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court’s findings on the award of shared physical care to be thorough and well-written and agree with the court’s conclusions.  We also find the district court’s decision to not award spousal support to be equitable.  We further find the district court did not abuse its discretion in its award of attorney fees to Jessie.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s decisions on shared care, spousal support, and attorney fees.  Given the parties’ economic positions and the significant disparity in income, equity requires Jared pay seventy-five percent of the children’s educational and extracurricular-activity expenses and Jessie pay twenty-five percent.  We modify the dissolution decree to require the parties to pay the expenses in accordance with those percentages.  Considering the parties’ economic positions and the minor modification in Jessie’s favor, Jared shall pay $1000.00 toward Jessie’s appellate attorney fees.  Costs on appeal shall be assessed one-half to each party. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, John D. Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (6 pages)

            Brandy Hansen appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage to James Hansen.  She argues the district court erred in granting James physical care of two children and child support.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on our de novo review of the record while giving deference to the district court’s findings, we conclude the court correctly awarded physical care of the two children to James.  We also conclude the court correctly awarded child support.  We decline to award either party appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (2 pages)

            S.B. appeals the juvenile court’s determination he must register with the sex offender registry.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the ruling of the juvenile court, and we affirm without further opinion. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (6 pages)

            K.T. challenges the district court’s finding of serious mental impairment, claiming there is insufficient evidence that she lacks sufficient judgment to make responsible decisions with respect to her hospitalization or treatment.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court’s findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence, and there was no error of law in the district court’s decision that K.T. lacked sufficient judgment to make responsible decisions regarding her care.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to C.P., her minor child.  She argues her parental rights should not have been terminated and guardianship of C.P. should have been given a family member.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude termination was proper, we decline to address the mother’s post-termination placement argument.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to four children.  OPINION HOLDS: With regard to the mother, we conclude the State failed to prove the grounds for termination.  With regard to the father, we conclude termination was not in the children’s best interests.  We reverse the termination decision as to both parents and remand for further proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Jason A. Burns, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Greer, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the statutory grounds for termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decision of the juvenile court to terminate the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Iowa County, Jason A. Burns, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Bower, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to B.B.  She argues the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination, termination is not in B.B.’s best interests, and the bond between them precludes termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because of the mother’s ongoing substance abuse and the relative weakness of her bond with B.B., we affirm the termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the juvenile court’s termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude termination was appropriate under Iowa law and consistent with the children’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Perry, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the statutory grounds for termination where the mother has a severe substance-abuse problem and was unable to maintain sobriety throughout the child-in-need-of-assistance proceedings.  She is unable to resume custody of the children at this time.  It is also in the children’s best interests to terminate her parental rights; the closeness of their bond should not prevent termination.  And, based on the mother’s history, an extension of time is not warranted.  We affirm.