Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 18-1092

Anthony Roland
v.
Annett Holdings, Inc.

The defendant seeks further review after the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s ruling certifying the case as a class action. The defendant contends the district court abused its discretion in certifying the class because the case does not present a common question of law or fact. The defendant further contends the individual factual and legal questions predominate over those common to the class.

County:
Polk
Trial Court Case No.:
CVCV051326

Resisters

Anthony Roland

Applicant

Annett Holdings, Inc.

Attorneys for Resisters

Christopher D. Spaulding
Nicholas L. Shaull
Matthew R. Denning
Donald G. Beattie
Nile Hicks

Attorneys for Applicant

Sasha L. Monthei

Supreme Court

Oral Argument Schedule

15-15-5

Dec 17, 2019 9:00 AM

Briefs

Supreme Court Opinion

Opinion Number:
18-1092
Date Published:
Mar 20, 2020

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
18-1092
Date Published:
Jul 24, 2019
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karen Romano, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Gamble, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (13 pages)

            Annett Holdings appeals the district court’s order certifying Anthony Roland’s class action, arguing the case presents no common question of fact or law and individual issues predominate over those common to the class.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s conclusion a question common to all class members, the legality of the Memorandum of Understanding, lies at the heart of the dispute, or in its conclusion that common issue predominates over the individual issues involved, we affirm and remand for further proceedings.

View archived opinions from prior to November 2017

© 2020 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.