May 2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (13 pages)

            A spouse appeals the division of property in the decree dissolving her marriage with her husband.  She also makes claims for trial attorney and expert witness fees, as well as requesting appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the increase of net value of an LLC formed during the marriage with the spouses as members should have been considered a divisible marital asset and modify the decree accordingly.  We otherwise affirm the district court’s decree and deny the wife’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (5 pages)

            Chloe Clark appeals the denial of postconviction relief from her simple-misdemeanor conviction for fifth-degree criminal mischief.  She argues that she received ineffective assistance of counsel because her counsel failed to ensure her plea was knowing and voluntary as she thought she was pleading guilty to littering.  OPINION HOLDS: Even assuming counsel breached an essential duty, Clark failed to prove prejudice.  There is no reasonable probability that Clark would not have pleaded guilty to this simple misdemeanor offense given the favorable plea agreement that resulted in the dismissal of two felony offenses.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES AFFIRMED IN PART AND VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF CORRECTED JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J. (7 pages)

            Bryant Wallace appeals his conviction and sentence, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent (Count I).  He also asserts the district court erred by imposing an uncharged sentencing enhancement and by failing to merge his conviction for conspiracy (Count III) with his conviction under Count I.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict on Count I, and so we affirm Wallace’s conviction for intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent.  As for the sentencing claims, we reject Wallace’s challenge to the mandatory minimum but vacate his conviction under Count III.  We remand this case for entry of a corrected judgment and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Iowa County, Justin Lightfoot, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            Van Otegham Dairy Partnership (VODP) appeals from the district court’s ruling granting Spahn & Rose Lumber Company’s (S&R) motion for summary judgment, arguing the district court erred (1) “in concluding that boilerplate fine print disclaiming responsibility for materials selection nullified S&R’s” (a) “express warranty to complete a workmanlike barn” and (b) “express agreement to design and build a dairy barn of good quality” and (2) “because [the district court’s] interpretation of the materials disclaimer violated the doctrine of expectations.”  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment as to counts one and four of VODP’s amended petition, and remand for further proceedings.  Because we can decide this appeal on VODP’s primary arguments, we need not address whether the contract was a contract of adhesion subject to the doctrine of reasonable expectations. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Casey D. Jones (plea) and Nicholas Scott (sentencing), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Doyen appeals his guilty plea, arguing that because he never signed his written guilty plea, the court cannot show he voluntarily and intelligently agreed to its terms, including waiving his right to file a motion in arrest of judgment, which our appellate courts have found to be a prerequisite to finding good cause to challenge the terms of his guilty plea on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Doyen had good cause to challenge his appeal.  But the record is devoid of information on whether the guilty plea was entered voluntarily and intelligently or if Doyen would have chosen to go to trial absent a defect in the guilty plea.  We affirm Doyen’s conviction and sentence; he may seek relief through a postconviction-relief action if he chooses.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Laura J. Parrish, Judge.  WRIT SUSTAINED IN PART, WRIT ANNULLED IN PART, AND CASE REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            Roger Lundtvedt contests the legality of the district court’s orders issued in a contempt action.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court exceeded the law by requiring Lundtvedt to pay attorney fees to purge his contempt, we sustain the writ of certiorari as to that part of the contempt order but annul the writ in all other particulars.  We remand to the district court for entry of an order consistent with this decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, James N. Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (19 pages)

            Dawn Cook appeals from a ruling that granted Scott Flieder’s petition to modify the parties’ dissolution decree to grant him physical care of the parties’ two children.  After moving out of state in 2018 and leaving the children in her mother’s care since then, Dawn claims that her “heavy reliance upon her mother to assist in raising the children does not make Scott a superior parent,” considering Scott’s failure to pay her any child support and his sporadic visitation with the children.  OPINION HOLDS: In this close case, we give careful consideration to the district court’s findings that Dawn previously denied Scott access to the children, Scott has recently become much more active in the children’s lives, and the children’s best interests are served by allowing them to remain in a familiar environment in their father’s care.  We affirm the district court’s decision granting Scott physical care.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because the father is an unemployed convicted sex offender and admitted domestic abuser, has limited to no experience meaningfully parenting the children on his own, and has never paid a dime of child support, I dissent from the majority's finding that he is a superior caretaker compared to the mother, who prioritized her career to financially support the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Blake H. Norman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A party to a real estate agreement appeals a ruling finding the agreement was not unconscionable, declaring the other party is the legal owner, and issuing a writ of possession to the other party.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals from a custody decree placing physical care of her two children with their father.  She argues the district court misweighed the relevant custodial factors and requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: After considering the district court’s implicit and explicit credibility findings, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  S.J. Telleen takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (3 pages)

            Debra Miller appeals the sentence imposed following her pleas of guilty to theft and assault while displaying a dangerous weapon.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of the court’s discretion in imposing a prison sentence, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Hans Becker, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (3 pages)

            A petitioner, M.Z., appeals the juvenile court’s dismissal of her petition to establish an involuntary guardianship over two minor children.  M.Z. argues the juvenile court’s dismissal was predicated on an incorrect interpretation of Iowa Code section 232D.301(1) (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: Because M.Z. failed to serve the minors and minors’ known parents pursuant to Iowa Code Section 232D.302 and Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.702, our court lacks jurisdiction, and we accordingly dismiss this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (22 pages)

            Nicole Shimp f/k/a Happel appeals the district court order modifying the visitation provisions of she and Brian Happel’s dissolution decree.  Nicole claims the district court erred by not granting her request for primary physical care of her and Brian’s three sons.  Alternatively, she argues the district court erred by altering the summer visitation schedule to eliminate her Wednesday overnight visitation with the children. Brian cross-appeals, claiming the district court erred by (1) denying his request for a week-on/week-off summer visitation schedule; (2) awarding Nicole $20,000 in trial attorney fees; and (3) incorrectly determining his gross income for child support purposes.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm on appeal and cross-appeal.