August 2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Marlita A. Greve, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (11 pages)

            Bridge Gap Engineering, LLC was granted uncontested summary judgment in this contract dispute against American Pfeiffer Corporation.  American Pfeiffer appeals the damages award, asserting the liquidated damages provision of their contract limits Bridge Gap’s ability to recover.  The district court denied American Pfeiffer’s motion to reconsider on the basis that the contract was additional evidence not already before the court.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court erred when it considered the contract additional evidence and did not reconsider the damages award to incorporate the contract terms.  We reverse the ruling on damages and remand for a determination of damages considering the applicability of the contract.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David M. Porter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (3 pages)

            Terreon Shabazz appeals his sentence, claiming the district court erroneously used a fixed age-related policy and otherwise abused its discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not apply a fixed age-related policy, as the court relied on Shabazz’s criminal history and failure to comply with community-based corrections in addition to this age.  The district court also did not abuse its discretion, as it relied on his criminal history, employment circumstances, and the nature of the offense.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by May, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the dismissal of a private termination action seeking termination of her child’s father’s parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother established statutory grounds for termination.  So we reverse the district court.  We remand for the district court to complete a best-interest analysis.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            Monique Jones-Baker appeals the sentence imposed on her criminal conviction, arguing the court abused its discretion by considering improper sentencing factors.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion by consideration of improper sentencing factors, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Tabitha Turner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            Chad Bradford appeals his guilty plea, asserting good cause exists for his appeal due to the failure of the district court to advise him of his right to file a motion in arrest of judgment. As to his guilty plea, Bradford contends he did not enter it knowingly and voluntarily because the district court incorrectly stated the minimum fine and failed to inform him of two surcharges he faced upon conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Bradford has good cause to appeal.  But under newly enacted Iowa Code section 814.29 (2021), we determine that Bradford failed to demonstrate that he more likely than not would not have entered into the plea had the court properly informed him of the lesser fine and advised him of the applicable surcharges.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by May, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court because the statutory grounds for termination were met and termination is in the child’s best interest.  We decline to apply a permissive exception to termination and find no abuse of discretion in the juvenile court’s denial of the mother’s motion for new trial. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by May, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A father and guardian ad litem (GAL) appeal following a juvenile court ruling on an Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904 motion in this child-in-need-of-assistance (CINA) proceeding.  Both argue the juvenile court should have returned the child to the father and closed the CINA case.  The GAL also argues the State has not made reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court did not make a determination as to whether the State provided reasonable efforts and instead decided it first needed both parties to present evidence on the issue.  We agree and remand so that can take place.  As to placement of the child and closure of the CINA case, we agree with the juvenile court that the child cannot be safely returned and the CINA case cannot be closed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Badding, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (8 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children.  She contends the State failed to prove the statutory grounds, termination is not in the children’s best interests, a termination exception applies, and she should be given additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Because her appeal challenges the wrong statutory ground and does not address one ground at all, she has waived any error related to those grounds.  And because she is not able to provide a safe and stable living situation for the children, we find her other challenges lack merit.  Accordingly, we affirm the termination.