 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| AMCO Ins. Co. v. Johnson, No. 7-413 / 06-1918,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment dismissing the landlord's action was affirmed because the tenants did not owe the landlord a duty to protect him from the damage caused by the guest's use of the stove, and res ipsa loquitur did not apply where it was undisputed the tenants did not have exclusive control of the stove at the time of the alleged negligent act.
|
|||||
| CBE Group, Inc. v. Anderson, No. 7-485 / 06-1383,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Default judgment against the collection agency and partially dismissing the collection agency's claim was affirmed, because the collection agency failed to appear at the pretrial conference pursuant to Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.971, and by failing to appear at the pretrial conference, the collection agency failed to take a required step.
|
|||||
| DeBruce Grain, Inc. v. Mitchell, No. 6-1010 / 05-1934,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father was not a party to an oral contract for the sale of grain entered into between his son and a corporation and was, therefore, not entitled to change the terms of the contract; further, the contract confirmation, by which the father sought to modify the contract terms, was not a contract and could not modify an oral contract.
|
|||||
| Foster v. Waterman, No. 7-237 / 06-1183,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father was not entitled to a modification of child custody based on changed circumstances under Iowa Code § 598.21D because, although child's move of more than 150 miles from her primary residence was a material change, the father did not establish an ability to provide superior care and it was important for the child to remain with her sibling.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Arends, No. 7-293 / 06-1761,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Iowa Code § 598.21(5), court did not err by ordering future payments to either party under wrongful death settlement resulting from death of their son to be divided equally; although settlement payment awarded wife approximately three times amount husband was awarded, it did not specify how much each party received for their various claims.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Kakavandi, No. 7-380 / 07-0083,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dissolution of marriage case, frequent conflicts between the mother and the son indicating a significant breakdown of their relationship, and the son's preference to be with his father, constituted a substantial change of circumstances which justified the transfer of physical care of the son from the mother to the father.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of A.M.G.-L., No. 7-448 / 07-0908,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because of a mother's drug problems and her failure to provide an adequate plan for her child's care after he was born, the juvenile court correctly adjudicated him to be a child in need of assistance under Iowa Code § 232.2(6)(c)(2) and (n), and determined that continuing supervision by the juvenile court system was necessary.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of B.G., No. 7-423 / 07-0839,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court found no abuse of discretion in juvenile court's denial of mother's request for concurrent jurisdiction in district court to litigate issue of custody of minor children because, at time of request, neither parent was in position to care for children and, in denying request, juvenile court was attending to children's best interests.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of B.T., No. 7-515 / 07-0761,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment denying the mother's request for termination of placement and return of custody of her child was affirmed, because the mother must demonstrate more consistent participation in services and visitation, and the mother had not shown a sufficient change in circumstances since the adjudication to warrant returning the child to her custody.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of H.J., No. 7-517 / 07-0946,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An order terminating a father's parental rights to his children pursuant to Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(f) (2007) was upheld where due to his limited cooperation with the Iowa Department of Human Services, there was no evidence that he would be capable of caring for his children once he was released from prison.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
