June 2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Sean W. McPartland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (12 pages)

            A worker was placed with a printing company by way of a labor broker.  After suffering an injury at the printing company while operating a machine, the worker brought a negligence claim against the printing company.  The district court granted the printing company’s motion for summary judgment, citing an exculpatory provision in the contract between the worker and the printing company.  OPINION HOLDS: The exculpatory provision is valid and enforceable, and therefore the plaintiff’s negligence suit is barred.  We reject the plaintiff’s arguments that either unsafe conditions at the printing company or the agreement between the printing company and the labor broker undermined the exculpatory provision.  The grant of summary judgment is affirmed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Humboldt County, Kurt L. Wilke, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (8 pages)

            Susan Reed sought to modify the custody provisions of the dissolution decree awarding shared care.  Susan requested the court order she have physical care of her and Andrew Reed’s younger child and modify the child support award accordingly.  While the district court adjusted Andrew’s child support obligation, which he does not appeal, it disagreed with Susan’s custody request.  The court declined to award Susan attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court order on Susan’s modification petition.  We decline to award Susan trial attorney fees and we deny both parties’ requests for appellate attorney fees.  We assess the costs of this appeal to Susan.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James A. McGlynn, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (5 pages)

            Benjamin Kerr appeals from a district court ruling denying his petition to modify the physical care provisions of the parties’ custody decree.  OPINION HOLDS: To warrant modification, Kerr must show a substantial change in circumstances that was not in contemplation by the court at the time of the custody decree and that he can provide superior care to the child.  He has failed to make such a showing and we therefore affirm the district court ruling.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (6 pages)

            Megan Dunaway appeals the grant of Kevin Dunaway’s motion to enforce a settlement agreement in a modification proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court order granting Kenneth’s motion to enforce settlement.  We deny Megan’s request for attorney fees.  We remand the matter to the district court for development of a record and the district court’s determination of Kenneth’s appellate attorney fee award, if any.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Barbara H. Liesveld, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Greer, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children.  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, argues termination is contrary to the children’s best interests given the parent-child bonds, and maintains she should be allowed additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            The mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to the child in this private termination action.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court that the father established abandonment by clear and convincing evidence and termination is in the child’s best interest.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Lars G. Anderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (10 pages)

            Matthew Meyer appeals the district court decision awarding the mother, Carrie Meyer, physical care of their one child.Alternatively, Matthew argues that if Carrie is granted physical care, the child’s best interests require affording him additional visitation.Matthew also requests that Carrie pay the costs of the appeal. OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that the minor child should be in the mother’s physical care.We modify the court’s ruling on visitation to accommodate Matthew’s request for every other weekend visitation in or near the vicinity where the child resides and to offer Matthew the extended Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends. The parties shall split equally the costs of the appeal.We affirm as modified.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Romonda D. Belcher, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  OPINION HOLDS: I. The State provided reasonable efforts to return the child to the mother’s care.  II. The child’s best interests are served by terminating both the mother’s and the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (11 pages)

            A father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to one child.  The father does not contest any of the grounds for termination, but claims it is a due process violation under the United States and Iowa Constitution to require him to file the petition on appeal prior to receiving and reviewing the transcript of the termination hearing; DHS did not make reasonable efforts toward reunification; and the court should have granted him an extension of time to reunify with the child.  The mother claims the State failed to prove grounds for termination and DHS failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We find all of the parents’ arguments without merit and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to three children.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of parental rights to the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to show the children could not be safely returned to the mother’s care and her parental rights were properly terminated.  We find the services provided to the mother were reasonable under the facts of the case.  We determine termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests and none of the exceptions to termination should be applied.  We affirm the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mark C. Cord III, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a three-year-old son.  He challenges the statutory grounds for termination and asks for a delay in permanency.  He also argues termination is not in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State proved a statutory ground for termination.  And we find termination is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm.