June 2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, Z.P., born in late 2016.  The father challenges the statutory ground for termination and argues the loss of his rights is not in Z.P.’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Greer, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their two children pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2019).  Both parents challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the statutory ground for termination cited by the juvenile court, argue termination is contrary to the children’s best interests, and maintain the court should have applied the exception to termination contained in Iowa Code section 232.116(3)(c).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children.  She raises three issues: (1) whether termination is in the best interest of the children; (2) whether the juvenile court erred by admitting into evidence exhibits alleged to be untimely filed or, alternatively, not granting the mother’s request for a continuance; and (3) whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence exhibits that were deemed timely because the juvenile court held the record open.  OPINION HOLDS: We find termination is in the best interest of the children, and the mother waived the remaining issues by failing to adequately argue them in her filings with this court.

No. 20-0625   IN RE A.F.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., May, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  He contends the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, the court should have granted him additional time to work toward reunification, the department of human services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification, and termination was not in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decision of the juvenile court to terminate the father’s parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his three children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father made little if any progress in his ability to safely care for the children and termination is in their best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Mullins, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (6 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, M.E., born in 2016.  He challenges the statutory ground for termination pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b) (2019).  Additionally, as an incarcerated parent who was unable to participate by telephone on the first day of the termination hearing, the father challenges the process that was afforded him regarding the day he was unable to participate.  OPINION HOLDS: We cannot find a due process violation here.  Our record is silent as to facts underlying the complaint the father now makes, and the father never raised this issue with the juvenile court.  We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights under paragraph (h) of section 232.116(1). 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Mary Pat Gunderson and David M. Porter, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  May, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (14 pages).

            Khamfay Lovan appeals his convictions for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver and possession of a firearm by a felon.  OPINION HOLDS: Lovan was not denied his right to a speedy trial.  We conclude the district court properly denied Lovan’s motion to suppress.  Lovan has not shown he received ineffective assistance of counsel.  We affirm Lovan’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (5 pages)

            Plaintiff appeals the district court’s rulings on several issues in his defamation action.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on the motion to compel, the motion in limine, and the partial directed verdict at the close of plaintiff’s case.  We find plaintiff’s arguments concerning whether certain statements were protected by a qualified privilege to be irrelevant, as the jury must have found defendants met their burden to prove the affirmative defense of truth.  For this same reason, the court did not err by granting a directed verdict on statements made to a third party who repeated the statements to others.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, Timothy O’Grady, Judge.  JUDGMENT OF CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED, and SENTENCES AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J. (15 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction on three counts of second-degree sexual abuse. OPINION HOLDS: The defendant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.  We reverse only the determinations as to restitution, which should be calculated in accordance with Iowa Supreme Court precedent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (20 pages)

            Plaintiffs appeal the district court decision granting a directed verdict to defendant on their claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and promissory estoppel.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court found there was sufficient evidence to present a claim of breach of fiduciary duty to the jury except for the element of damages.  There was sufficient evidence of damages as to some of the plaintiffs, and the court erred by granting a directed verdict on breach of fiduciary duty as to them.  We reverse and remand on this issue.  We affirm the evidentiary ruling of the trial court as to a proceeds model.  For the other claims—breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and fraud—the court did not err in granting a directed verdict.  We affirm the district court on these claims.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey Farrell, Douglas F. Staskal, and Jeanie Vaudt, Judges.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (5 pages)

                A municipality and several officials appeal following a district court ruling determining their motion for summary judgment to be moot, arguing the district court erred in granting the appellee additional time to respond to their motion for summary judgment, and claiming the court should have ruled on the motion.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no remaining justiciable controversy and dismiss the appeal as moot.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Arthur E. Gamble, Judge.  JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Mullins, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Gamble, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (10 pages)

            Michael Gerken appeals his convictions of first-degree theft and ongoing criminal conduct, contending (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s findings of guilt, (2) the district court abused its discretion “in allowing the State to reopen the record to provide additional evidence on essential elements of ongoing criminal conduct,” (3) his trial attorney was ineffective in “handling the jury instructions for both offenses,” and (4) the district court erred in ordering “an unknown amount of attorney fees.”  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Gerken’s convictions, and we vacate the provision in the order of disposition requiring Gerken to make restitution and remand for further proceedings.