2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by May, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (11 pages)

            A landowner appeals from the denial of his petition for writ of mandamus.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no error of law in the district court’s decision to deny the petition for writ of mandamus, grant summary judgment with respect to the county attorney, or exclude the agency letter from evidence.  Therefore, we affirm the district court’s ruling in each of these respects.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (13 pages)

            Flanagan Corporation contends the district court wrongly dismissed the corporation from the lawsuit.  Tim Flanagan argues the district court improperly denied his motion for default judgment against Peter Cannon, one of the members of Lake Cabin Partners, LLC (LCP).  Flanagan Corporation and Flanagan appeal the district court’s ruling that LCP and its members did not fraudulently transfer funds from LCP and Cannon did not fraudulently convey his interest.  Lastly, Flanagan alleges the district court wrongly denied his requests for punitive damages and attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the court properly dismissed Flanagan Corporation from the proceedings.  We determine the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Flanagan’s motion for default against Cannon.  On our de novo review, we find Cannon and the Boltons did not fraudulently convey funds from LCP, nor did Cannon fraudulently convey his interest in LCP to the Boltons.  The district court properly denied the request for punitive damages and attorney fees.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Thomas G. Reidel and Jeffrey D. Bert, Judges.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (16 pages)

            A farm tenant appeals the grant of summary judgment dismissing his counterclaim against the landowners who rented him farmland.  He also appeals the award of attorney fees to the landowners provided for in their lease agreement, and the landowners request appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court did not err when it found Kurtenbach failed to show there were genuine issues of material fact on his counterclaim of tortious conduct (which encompassed slander of title, defamation, and interference with existing and prospective contracts) and concluded the landowners were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.  We also affirm the award of trial attorney fees and award appellate attorney fees under the contract.  We remand for a determination of those fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge. AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (13 pages)

            The Iowa Insurance Division (Division) issued a decision finding Anthony Weber and Jerrold Rothouse engaged in the sale of unregistered securities in Iowa.  Weber and Rothouse sought judicial review, arguing a fact dispute remained that precluded the Division from deciding the charge against them on summary judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: On the record before us, we find no genuine issue of material fact that the agreements Weber and Rothouse offered to Iowan investors were securities and they were not registered as required by Iowa law.  Therefore, we affirm the district court’s ruling affirming the Division’s decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Gregory G. Milani, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by May, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Scott, S.J.* Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            Joseph Allen Bloom appeals his judgment and sentence in connection with a home invasion that resulted in stolen property and serious physical injuries.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject Bloom’s challenges to the sufficiency of corroborating evidence, non-merger of his assault conviction, and application of the sentencing enhancement.  However, we remand the case for entry of an order merging his conviction for willful injury causing serious injury with first-degree robbery.  We note resentencing is not required because the sentence for his willful injury conviction was ordered to run concurrently with his conviction for first-degree robbery.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (3 pages)

            Brent Olmstead appeals the district court’s decision to sentence him to a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years following his conviction for second-degree theft, arguing the court inappropriately considered his employment and housing circumstances in rejecting the recommendations of the presentence investigation investigator and the prosecutor.  OPINION HOLDS: Olmstead’s sentence is affirmed, as the district court did not abuse its discretion or consider any inappropriate factors in sentencing Olmstead. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Mark Fowler, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mullins, S.J.*  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (11 pages)

            William Beeman appeals the summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief, claiming the district court erred in granting summary disposition on the basis that the application was premature.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the basis cited by the district court.  With the exception of Beeman’s claim relating to the State’s alleged destruction of biological evidence, we find the entry of summary disposition was proper as either time-barred by the statute of limitations or already the subject of a final adjudication in another proceeding Beeman has taken to secure relief, as was alternatively argued by the State in the district court.  We reverse the entry of summary disposition on the destruction-of-evidence claim, affirm the entry of summary disposition on all other claims, and remand for further proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Kathleen A. Kilnoski, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

            Jonathan Armstrong appeals following the summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief.  He argues the court abused its discretion in denying his motion for an investigator at State expense, summary disposition was inappropriate, and postconviction counsel rendered ineffective assistance.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the summary disposition of Armstrong’s postconviction relief application. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monona County, Duane E. Hoffmeyer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Carr, S.J.*  Opinion by Greer, P.J. (5 pages)

            Jay Lee Neubaum challenges the dismissal of his combined motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment alleging prosecutorial misconduct during the State’s closing argument.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Neubaum failed to either object to the controverted statements or make a motion for mistrial before the case was submitted to the jury, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Neubaum’s combined motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment.  Without these objections, the district court’s choice not to address the issue sua sponte is not reversible error.  Further, Iowa does not allow for plain error review to bypass this timing problem. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Thomas G. Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Appellants argue the district court erred in finding two of their claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations—and that their remaining two claims are therefore moot—because the discovery rule and doctrine of equitable estoppel apply.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s conclusion that the discovery rule is unavailable to the Appellants.  Summary judgment is not appropriate at this time as genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether equitable estoppel ever applied, when equitable estoppel no longer applied, and whether the time between when the estoppel ended and appellants filed suit was unreasonable.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (10 pages)

            The question presented here is whether a consent decree is an available dispositional option for a child on youthful offender status.  OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court made no error in determining a consent decree was not an available dispositional order for a child on youthful offender status.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Chris Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by May, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Timothy Ovel appeals his criminal sentence and argues the sentencing judge should have recused himself.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion on any grounds.  So we affirm.