2023 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (7 pages)

            Danielle appeals the termination of her parental rights to her one-year-old daughter.  She contends the State failed to prove a ground for termination or that termination was in her daughter’s best interest.  She also urges us to apply an exception to preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the State met its burden and that no exception applies, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  Both challenge the statutory grounds authorizing termination, claim termination is not in the children’s best interests, and seek application of a permissive exception to termination.  The mother also requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established statutory grounds authorizing termination of both parents’ rights.  Termination is in the children’s best interests with respect to both parents.  We decline to apply a permissive exception to preclude termination of either parents’ rights.  We do not grant the mother any additional time to work toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachel E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            The mother, who pled guilty to sexually exploiting and producing child pornography of one of her children, appeals the contested termination of her rights to two of the three children.  She does not contest termination of her rights to the third child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the mother leaves at least one statutory ground unchallenged for each child on appeal, termination is in the best interests of the children, and no permissive exceptions apply.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, William S. Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Greer, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals a permanency ruling denying her request for an extension of time for reunification.  She also contests the juvenile court’s grant of concurrent jurisdiction to the district court for custody determinations.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the extension of time was unwarranted, and the mother failed to preserve error on her challenge to concurrent jurisdiction.  So we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Thomas J. Straka, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A father, C.M., appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing the juvenile court should have granted him a six-month extension or utilized the permissive exception found in Iowa Code section 232.116(3)(c) (2023) due to the bond between he and the children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because a six-month extension would not be appropriate and the strength of the bond between the father and the children does not outweigh the need for termination, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  She argues that termination of her parental rights is not in the children’s best interests and an extension of time for reunification efforts should be granted.  Alternatively, the mother asserts a guardianship should be established with the maternal grandfather.  OPINION HOLDS: We determine termination is in the children’s best interests, an extension of time is not warranted, and termination of the mother’s parental rights, rather than a guardianship. is the appropriate permanency option.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to E.B., born in 2022, under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e), (h), and (l) (2023).  The mother appeals, arguing the grounds for termination were not proved or, alternatively, that she should get six more months to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The child could not be returned to the mother in Texas, where she was living at the time of the termination trial, and we will not gamble on E.B.’s future by delaying permanency six months.  We affirm.    

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Van Buren County, Shawn Showers, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; APPEAL DISMISSED ON CROSS-APPEAL. Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            Gail Klodt appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of First Iowa State Bank (the Bank).  She argues the court erred in dismissing her counterclaims filed against the Bank in its foreclosure action against Gail and her former husband Bradley Klodt.  The Bank filed a cross-appeal against third-party defendant and former Bank employee, Joel Shumate.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no error at law in the district court’s dismissal of Gail’s counterclaims for fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent nondisclosure, or breach of contract.  With this result, we need not reach the Bank’s cross-appeal regarding the reinstatement of its action against Shumate.  We therefore affirm the district court’s order regarding Gail’s counterclaims and dismiss the Bank’s cross-appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark D. Cleve, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (5 pages)

            Gabriel Luis Vasquez appeals the summary dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief (PCR) challenging his 2009 convictions for sexual abuse, contending his application was not time-barred.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in finding Vasquez’s second PCR application was not promptly filed after the conclusion of his first and thus was time-barred.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  Partial Dissent by Schumacher, P.J.  (18 pages)

            Tara Sommerville and Jamie Sommerville appeal economic provisions of the decree dissolving their marriage.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Jamie’s income is best determined by averaging his earnings, which amounts to $142,763 per year.  We remand to the district court to calculate the amount of child support based on Jamie earning this amount.  Based on Tara’s need and Jamie’s ability to pay, we modify the decree to award Tara $1800 per month in spousal support, terminating at the death of either party.  II. Because Jamie’s failure to file tax returns and pay income tax was not dissipation of marital assets, we affirm, we affirm the decree’s treatment of the outstanding tax liability as a joint marital debt to be divided between the parties.  III. We affirm the district court’s division of the property. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur in the majority opinion regarding the issues of dissipation of marital assets, the property division provisions of the decree, and the remand to the district court for child support recalculation.  And I concur in the majority’s calculation of the amount of Jamie’s income for child support and alimony purposes using the historical data contained in the parties’ tax returns.  I respectfully depart ways from the majority opinion only in regard to the amount of traditional spousal support ordered to be paid by Jamie, finding such too great given the relative incomes of the parties, the existing marital debt, and relative tax consequences.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Carlos Navarrette appeals the denial of his post-conviction relief application.  He claims his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate the possibility of certain defenses and obtain an expert witness.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Navarrette’s trial counsel did not breach an essential duty.  As such, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (6 pages)

            Sean Hilliard appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because he failed to establish the requisite prejudice by a preponderance of the evidence, we affirm.