Free Iowa Supreme Court case summaries from Justia.
If you are unable to see this message, click here to view it in a web browser. | | Iowa Supreme Court January 25, 2021 |
|
|
Click here to remove Verdict from subsequent Justia newsletter(s). | New on Verdict Legal Analysis and Commentary | |
Iowa Supreme Court Opinions | State v. Waigand | Docket: 19-0089 Opinion Date: January 22, 2021 Judge: Thomas D. Waterman Areas of Law: Criminal Law | The Supreme Court reversed the restitution order of the district court, holding that the State failed to prove the full amount of restitution was caused by the crime of conviction. Defendant pled guilty to ongoing criminal conduct and admitted that the victim bank's losses totaled $288,000. The bank obtained a civil deficiency judgment of $988,636. The district court ordered Defendant to pay restitution in the full amount of the bank's loss rather than the amount Defendant admitted converting. The Supreme Court vacated the restitution amount in excess of $288,000 and remanded the case for entry of an amended restitution award in that amount, holding that the district court's order was not supported by substantial evidence. | | State v. Wieneke | Docket: 20-0126 Opinion Date: January 22, 2021 Judge: Per Curiam Areas of Law: Criminal Law | The Supreme Court vacated Defendant's sentence for domestic abuse assault while displaying a dangerous weapon, holding that the district court exceeded its statutory sentencing authority in this case. The district court sentenced Defendant to an indeterminate term of incarceration not to exceed two years, suspended all but six days of the sentence, and placed Defendant on probation for two years. On appeal, the court of appeals noted that the imposed sentence appeared to be an illegal split sentence but declined to resolve the issue. The Supreme Court exercised its discretion to correct the illegality in this case, holding that the district court imposed a statutorily unauthorized sentence by suspending a portion of Defendant's indeterminate sentence. | | No Boundry, LLC v. Hoosman | Docket: 19-0431 Opinion Date: January 22, 2021 Judge: McDonald Areas of Law: Real Estate & Property Law | The Supreme Court reversed the order of the district court denying Defendant's motion to set aside a default judgment awarding Plaintiff immediate and exclusive possession of Defendant's home, holding that the district court erred in denying Defendant's motion to set aside the default judgment. Plaintiff obtained title to Defendant's home by way of a tax sale deed and, after filing a petition for recovery of real property, obtained a default judgment awarding it possession of Defendant's home. Defendant filed a motion to set aside the default judgment, asserting that he was legally disabled and exempt from paying property taxes and that he had been trying to resolve the property tax issue for some time. The district court denied the motion. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that Defendant established good cause to set aside the default judgment. | |
|
About Justia Opinion Summaries | Justia Daily Opinion Summaries is a free service, with 68 different newsletters, covering every federal appellate court and the highest courts of all US states. | Justia also provides weekly practice area newsletters in 63 different practice areas. | All daily and weekly Justia newsletters are free. Subscribe or modify your newsletter subscription preferences at daily.justia.com. | You may freely redistribute this email in whole. | About Justia | Justia is an online platform that provides the community with open access to the law, legal information, and lawyers. |
|
|