May 2021 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (10 pages)

            Guardians appeal the termination of a minor guardianship.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination of the guardianship would be harmful to the child.  The harm suffered by the child outweighs the parent’s interest in terminating the guardianship.  So we reverse the juvenile court’s termination of the guardianship and remand for entry of an order reinstating the guardianship.  We do not award the parent any attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Chris Foy, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (6 pages)

            K.B. appeals the district court’s order of continued commitment under Iowa Code chapter 229 (2019).  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence is insufficient to establish K.B. is a danger to himself or others.  We reverse and remand for termination of K.B.’s outpatient commitment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            A personal injury plaintiff appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for not showing good cause for untimely service of process on the defendant.  The district court initially granted Larson’s extension request.  But after reconsidering, the court reversed its holding because Larson failed to show good cause.  Larson seeks reinstatement of his petition.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dismissal of Larson’s petition, because the district court could correct its initial order and the court properly found that Larson did not show good cause for his untimely service.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Peter B. Newell, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (5 pages)

            C.B. was adjudicated to have committed the delinquent act of aiding and abetting the possession of stolen property, which would constitute theft in the second degree, a class “D” felony, if C.B. was an adult.  On appeal, C.B. claims the State failed to present sufficient evidence that he aided and abetted in the possession of a stolen motor vehicle because it did not prove he was an active participant in the commission of the crime, encouraged the other juveniles’ delinquent acts, or that he had knowledge of the principal’s wrongdoing.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the evidence demonstrates C.B. knew the vehicle was stolen, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Chris Foy, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (4 pages)

            K.B. appeals the district court’s order dismissing his appeal from a magistrate’s order continuing his commitment under Iowa Code chapter 229 (2020).  OPINION HOLDS: We lack subject matter jurisdiction because K.B. failed to timely appeal the magistrate’s order to the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a daughter.  He contends it was not in her best interests to terminate his rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interests based on founded child-abuse allegations, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination.  And the Iowa Department of Human Services made reasonable efforts toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Greer, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother has not shown termination would be detrimental to the children and the juvenile court should have applied a permissive factor under Iowa Code section 232.116(3) (2020) to prevent termination.  In addition, the circumstances do not warrant an extension of six months as the evidence does not indicate the need for removal will be resolved at the end of that time.  Therefore, we affirm termination. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Jennifer Bahr, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (7 pages)

            The father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because multiple difficulties continue to exist with each parent that prevent them from safely caring for K.L., we affirm the juvenile court’s termination order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Peter B. Newell, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (12 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, R.E, born in 2017.  The juvenile court terminated the father’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) (2020).  On appeal, the father claims the State failed to prove grounds for termination, termination of his parental rights is not in the child’s best interests, and the court should have applied a permissive exception to termination based on the mother having custody of the child and his close bond with the child.  Finally, the father maintains the juvenile court should have ordered a hearing on his application for a bridge order.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Brendan Greiner, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.   Opinion by Mullins, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and her child’s guardian ad litem (GAL) separately appeal the juvenile court’s permanency order transferring sole custody of the child, born in 2013, to her father.  Both the mother and GAL argue there was not clear and convincing evidence the child could not be returned to the mother’s care at the time of the permanency hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the child could be safely returned to the mother’s home during the mother’s parenting time under the shared care arrangement but brief transition services may be appropriate.  We reverse the juvenile court’s permanency determination, and we remand the matter to the district court to enter a permanency order exercising one of the options contained in Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(a) or (b) (2019).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (12 pages)

            The mother of all five children and the father of the youngest two children appeal the order terminating their respective parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we conclude the State established statutory grounds for terminating both parents’ parental rights.  We also conclude termination of the parents’ rights is in the best interests of the children, an additional six months would not negate the need for removal, and the closeness of the parents’ relationships with the children does not overcome the need for termination due to the safety concerns involved.