January 2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Badding, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (2 pages)

            Larry Bell Sr. appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his claims of “destruction of personal property.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm without opinion pursuant to Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.1203.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (8 pages)

            A defendant appeals a discretionary sentence imposed following guilty pleas to theft in two case numbers.  The defendant argues the district court abused its discretion when imposing a prison sentence by relying on what he claims were impermissible factors—his substance‑abuse history and failure to rehabilitate.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding these considerations required by law and supported by the record before the sentencing court, we discern no abuse of discretion and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

                Joseli Alves‑Dunkerson and Relationship, Intimacy & Sexual Health, Inc. (RIS) appeal the district court’s judgment against them in a breach‑of‑contract action.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not err in finding that Alves‑Dunkerson and RIS breached the contract, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Patrick D. Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (11 pages)

    Michelle Tuttle, a workers’ compensation claimant, appeals the district court’s dismissal of her judicial review action asserting the deputy workers’ compensation commissioner lacks the authority to enter sanctions following her serving a subpoena on an agency witness.  After an earlier remand from our court, Tuttle recast and amended her petition for judicial review.  The district court found Tuttle has an adequate agency remedy in appealing the deputy’s decision to the commissioner that she has not yet exhausted.  Unhappy with the judicial review decision, she appeals, contending there is no adequate agency remedy to exhaust because the deputy and the commissioner lack “subject matter jurisdiction” to “adjudicate subpoenas.”  She also contends the proceedings before the commissioner violated her due process rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court correctly determined that Tuttle has an adequate agency remedy in asking the commissioner to determine whether the deputy had the statutory authority to impose the sanction that she has not yet exhausted.  Tuttle did not preserve the due process issue for review.  We affirm the district court’s decision.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A defendant convicted for failing to appear for sentencing in a separate criminal matter appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Reviewing for abuse of discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the district court’s final judgment establishing custody, visitation, and child support.  He argues the district court erred in (1) finding joint physical care was not in the best interests of the children and awarding primary physical care with the mother, and (2) calculating child support and past child support.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s physical care determination and the father’s child support obligation but modify the father’s back child support obligation.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Edward Campbell appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Campbell’s application was filed well beyond the three-year limitation period and he has not shown an exception applies, we affirm the dismissal of his application as time-barred.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (5 pages)

James Morgan Jr. appeals his sentence for two burglary convictions, arguing that the prosecutor breached the plea agreement.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the prosecutor appearing at Morgan’s sentencing violated the plea agreement by making no recommendation for concurrent sentences, we vacate the consecutive ten-year terms and remand for resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            A parent appeals a sanctions order that awarded attorney fees and dismissed his petition to modify custody.  OPINIONS HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding a violation of Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413 and imposing a monetary sanction against the father, we affirm in part.  But dismissal was not an appropriate sanction under our case law, so we reverse in part and remand for further proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Andrew Chappell, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (15 pages)

            A Cedar Rapids resident appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his lawsuit claiming members of the Cedar Rapids city council violated Iowa’s open meetings statute when they closed the job interview of an applicant for the position of city clerk and argues the district court erred in its orders closing part of the trial and sealing the recording of the job interview meeting.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s judgment and hold that the closed session should have been reopened to the public upon the council’s assessment that no needless and irreparable injury would occur to the applicant during the interview.  Accordingly, we remand for the district court to determine damages and any applicable defenses.  We affirm the district court’s denial of the resident’s motion to reconsider insofar as it relates to the district court’s decision to close part of trial and seal the closed meeting recording. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Sean Huffman appeals an Iowa Department of Health and Human Services’s founded child abuse assessment and the placement of his name on the child abuse registry.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no violation of Huffman’s rights, and we conclude Huffman has failed to show the invalidity of the Department’s findings and placement of his name on the central registry. Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Patrick McAvan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the private termination of his parental rights to his son under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2023).  He argues the mother did not prove the statutory ground of abandonment or that termination is in the son’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving the juvenile court’s factual findings their due weight, we find the father has not maintained substantial and continuous contact with the son since 2020 and thus abandoned the son.  And termination of the father’s parental rights is in the son’s best interest, especially considering the limited father-son relationship and the healthy environment now provided by the mother and her fiancé.