Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0680
View Summary for Case No. 18-0680
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Mark E. Kruse, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Bower, JJ. Opinion by Vogel, C.J. (2 pages)
Kelvin Willform appeals his convictions for domestic abuse assault by strangulation causing bodily injury and false imprisonment. He asserts his counsel was ineffective for failing to move for a competency hearing and for failing to call his parole officer as a witness. OPINION HOLDS: On this record, we affirm Willform’s convictions but preserve his ineffective-assistance claims for possible postconviction relief so a complete record may be developed and to afford trial counsel an opportunity to respond to the claims.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0702
View Summary for Case No. 18-0702
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Blane, S.J. Opinion by Potterfield, P.J. (3 pages)
W.S. appeals from an order finding he remained seriously mentally impaired. OPINION HOLDS: Appeal dismissed as untimely.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0730
View Summary for Case No. 18-0730
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Wittig, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Vogel, C.J., Vaitheswaran J., and Gamble, S.J. Opinion by Gamble, S.J. (19 pages)
Robert (Bobby) Reiff, doing business as Reiff Funeral Home and Crematory, appeals from an adverse judgment entered in favor of Reiff Funeral Homes, Inc. and its principal Joseph (Joe) Reiff in this common law trademark infringement suit. Bobby asserts the district court erred in concluding “Reiff Funeral Home” has a secondary meaning entitled to trademark protections and the plaintiff’s case should be dismissed on the basis of laches. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude Joe proved he had a valid trademark in the name of Reiff Funeral Home and Bobby infringed on that trademark. Joe’s trademark infringement claim ripened when Bobby used the internet to enter Joe’s market. Bobby failed to prove his equitable defense of laches.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0753
View Summary for Case No. 18-0753
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Richard B. Clogg, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by McDonald, J. (10 pages)
Kathryn Rhoten appeals the district court decision denying her challenge to the validity of a premarital agreement filed in the probate proceedings for her late husband, John Rhoten. OPINION HOLDS: We find Kathryn has not shown the premarital agreement is unenforceable on the ground John failed to disclose all of his assets and debts to her and further find the premarital agreement is not unconscionable. We affirm the district court.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0793
View Summary for Case No. 18-0793
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Kossuth County, David A. Lester, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, P.J. (10 pages)
Limited liability company WMG appeals the district court’s grant of Joseph Goche’s motion for summary judgment on Joseph’s claim against WMG for its breach of a warranty deed. The district court applied the doctrine of merger and rejected WMG’s request to reform the contract. OPINION HOLDS: WMG raised a genuine issue of material fact by attempting to make a contrary showing to overcome the presumption of merger. The district court erred when it granted Joseph’s motion for summary judgment. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0884
View Summary for Case No. 18-0884
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by McDonald, J. Dissent by Vaitheswaran, J. (15 pages)
Benjamin Monat appeals from the decree dissolving his marriage to Heather Monat. He argues the district court erred in awarding Heather physical care of the children, its division of property, and in awarding Heather spousal support. Heather requests appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in declining to award joint physical care of the parties’ children and instead awarding Heather physical care of the children. The property division was equitable. However, the court’s award of spousal support was inequitable. We strike that portion of the decree. Heather’s request for appellate attorney fees is denied. DISSENT ASSERTS: I believe the district court acted equitably in awarding Heather spousal support, and I would affirm that portion of the district court order.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0885
View Summary for Case No. 18-0885
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Adria A.D. Kester, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by McDonald, J. (7 pages)
Khamfeung Thongvanh appeals the denial of his application for post-conviction relief. OPINION HOLDS: Thongvanh’s application is not time-barred, however, the district court was correct in denying Thongvanh’s application because State v. Plain does not apply retroactively.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-0926
View Summary for Case No. 18-0926
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Sean McPartland and Denver D. Dillard, Judges. AFFIRMED. Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Mullins, J. (5 pages)
Jianning Wang appeals the dismissal of his civil petition for failure to comply with the service requirements of the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Wang’s petition, without prejudice.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-1002
View Summary for Case No. 18-1002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul R. Huscher, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. Heard by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Mullins, J. (17 pages)
An injured worker appeals the district court’s judicial review decision in his workers’ compensation case. OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the award of permanent-partial-disability (PPD) benefits. We agree with the appeal deputy’s interpretation and application of Iowa Code section 86.13 (2013) in determining penalty benefits. We find no abuse of discretion in the allocation of costs. Therefore, we affirm those parts of the district court judgment that affirm the commissioner’s ruling on Baccam’s PPD benefits and taxation of transcript costs. We reverse that part of the district court judgment remanding the case to the workers’ compensation commissioner with directions. Costs on appeal are taxed to Baccam.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-1015
View Summary for Case No. 18-1015
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey L. Poulson, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by McDonald, J. (4 pages)
A mother appeals a provision of a decree establishing custody, visitation, and support, which determined the child should bear the father’s surname rather than the mother’s. OPINION HOLDS: It is in the child’s best interest to bear the mother’s surname.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-1120
View Summary for Case No. 18-1120
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Sean W. McPartland, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by McDonald, J. (3 pages)
A plaintiff appeals the grant of summary judgment on his claim of unjust enrichment. OPINION HOLDS: The grant of summary judgment was proper because the defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law and no unjust enrichment occurred.
Filed Mar 06, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-1124
View Summary for Case No. 18-1124
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Lars Anderson and Chad Kepros, Judges. AFFIRMED. Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Mullins, J. (4 pages)
Troy Hartson appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) on statute-of-limitations grounds. He argues his application is based on newly-discovered evidence and he is therefore excepted from the statute of limitations and the court erred in dismissing his application without affording him a hearing. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dismissal of Hartson’s PCR application.