2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Mark J. Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (12 pages)

            Keith DeMoss appeals dissolution decree granting Ashlee Hingtgen physical care of their two sons.  He contends the district court should have awarded him physical care or at least joint physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the parties struggle to communicate and maintain animosity toward each other, we find joint physical care would not be in the best interests of the children.  As to the physical care determination, we affirm the court’s ruling in favor of Ashlee based on the need to maintain long-term stability for the children. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Alan Heavens, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (10 pages)

            Brenda Bohlke appeals an order modifying her dissolution decree, which denied her request for joint physical care and denied her liberal visitation in the alternative.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no grounds to disturb the district court’s order.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            Richard Bauer filed a defamation suit over comments Bradley Brinkman made on Facebook.  The district court denied Bauer’s motion for partial summary judgment and granted Brinkman’s motion for summary judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Brinkman’s comments may have been vulgar, offensive, insulting, and just plain rude, but they did not rise to the level of defamatory statements because they were expressions of opinion protected by the first amendment.  Finding the statements at issue did not constitute defamation, we affirm the district court’s denial of Bauer’s motion for summary judgment and grant of summary judgment to Brinkman.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary S. Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (4 pages)

            Nathaniel Deal appeals his ten-year prison sentence for possession with intent to deliver cocaine, contending the district court abused its discretion in sentencing by placing too much weight on his past behavior from years ago instead of his current circumstances.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court properly weighed permissible sentencing factors, including both negative and positive factors, we find no abuse of discretion.  And thus we affirm his sentence. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights in this private termination action.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the father’s parental rights on the ground of abandonment.  We conclude it is in the child’s best interests to terminate the father’s parental rights.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., May, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The children could not be safely returned to the mother.  The father waived his reasonable-efforts challenge, and his challenge would be unsuccessful if preserved.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children, contending (1) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination; (2) termination was not in the children’s best interests; (3) the district court should have invoked certain exceptions to termination; (4) the district court should have granted him six additional months to obtain a custody modification order and (5) the district court violated the Equal Protection Clauses of the United States and Iowa Constitutions.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm termination of the father’s parental rights to his children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Brendan Greiner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject the father’s request for guardianship as a permanency option and find his reasonable-efforts argument is unpreserved.  We find termination is in the best interest of A.M. and K.M. and that placing custody and guardianship with DHS for a pre-adoptive placement decision is in the children’s best interest.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (10 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court order terminating his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination of parental rights was the appropriate permanency option for A.M., a one-year-old child.  Reasonable efforts for reunification were provided to the father.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (5 pages)

            A father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to two children.  The father contends (1) the juvenile court should have placed the children in a guardianship; (2) termination was not in the children’s best interests; and (3) the juvenile court should have invoked an exception to termination.  The mother contends: (1) her due process rights were violated when the juvenile court denied her request for an in-person termination hearing; (2) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court; (3) termination was not in the children’s best interests; (4) she should have been granted a six-month extension; and (5) the juvenile court should have invoked an exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the parents’ rights to the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Greer, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  Both challenge the juvenile court’s refusal to grant a six-month extension and argue termination was not in the child’s best interests.  The mother also challenges the court’s denial of her motion to continue for an in-person hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to her five minor children.  On appeal, the mother challenges the statutory grounds for termination and argues termination is not in the children’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: The State met its burden of establishing the statutory grounds for termination.  Termination is in the children’s best interest.  We affirm.