|
|
|
(Maintained by the Iowa
Judicial Branch)
| No. 05-1898 [6-824]
Filed January 18, 2007 |
| Full Opinion |
Summary |
No. 05-1898. [6-824]
WANFALT v. BURLINGTON BANK AND TRUST
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Louisa County, Mary Ann Brown, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered en banc.
Opinion by Vogel, J. Special
concurrence by Sackett, C.J.
|
|
Timothy K. Wink and Jay Schweitzer of Schweitzer & Wink, Columbus Junction, for
appellants. James W. Miller of Cray, Goddard, Miller
& Taylor, L.L.P., Burlington, for appellee.
Considered en banc. |
| Justice CADY |
| No. 21 / 04-1323
Filed March 24, 2006 |
| Full Opinion |
Word Document |
LARRY STEWART d/b/a LARRY STEWART REALTY, Appellant,
vs.
JEFFREY P. SISSON, Appellee.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, James
M. Drew, Judge.
A real estate broker appeals from a summary judgment dismissing
all claims for recovery of a commission from the sale of a business based upon an oral
agreement. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
|
Judith
M. O'Donohoe of Elwood, O'Donohoe, Stochl, Braun & Churbuck, Charles City, attorney
for appellant.
Joel J. Yunek of Yunek Isaacson, P.L.C., Mason City, attorney for appellee.
|
| Justice CADY |
| No. 131 / 04-0564
Filed March 10,
2006 |
| Full Opinion |
Word Document |
FJORDS NORTH, INC., Appellant,
vs.
RANDY HAHN, SUSAN HAHN and H & H HOMEBUILDERS, Appellees.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Larry J. Conmey, Judge.
Appeal from district court judgment
ruling that claim to extend restrictive covenants under Iowa Code section 614.24 was
invalid due to claimant’s failure to specify time and manner in which he acquired his
interest. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
|
Daniel DenBeste and Robert M. Hogg of Elderkin & Pirnie, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids,
for appellant.
Michael J. Pitton of Martinek & Pitton, Iowa City, for appellees
|
| Justice CADY |
| No.
5-742 / 04-170
Filed November 23,
2005 |
| Full Opinion |
Summary |
DALE J. LAUTENBACH and TERESA F. FIELDS-LAUTENBACH,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
vs.
DONALD J. ROWAN and ANNETTE ROWAN, Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County,
Gary G. Kimes, Judge. AFFIRMED.
|
Erik A. Luthens of
Luthens Law Offices, P.C., West Des Moines, for appellants.
John H. Terpstra of Brierly Charnetski, L.L.P., Newton, for appellees..
|
| Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Miller and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Opinion by Miller, J. |
| No. 73 / 04-0002
Filed September 9, 2005 |
| Full Opinion |
Full Opinion
Word Document |
BUSINESS CONSULTING
SERVICES, INC.
d/b/a
HAWKEYE BUSINESS BROKERS,
Appellee,
vs.
LEROY WICKS,
Appellant.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg,
Judge.
Seller of business appeals from judgment on behalf of broker for
commission on sale of the business. REVERSED AND
REMANDED. |
|
Michael L. Jankins of Murray, Jankins & Noble, Des Moines, for appellant.
William B. Serangeli and Jeffry K. Clayton of Smith, Schneider, Stiles & Serangeli,
P.C., Des Moines, for appellee. |
|
| No.
03-1251. [34] Filed April 29,
2005 |
| Full Opinion |
Full Opinion
Word Document |
CRAIG J. JENSEN,
Appellant, vs. JAMES A. SATTLER and JULIE M. SATTLER, Appellees.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Douglas S. Russell, Judge.
Buyer of real estate appeals dismissal of claims against sellers for failure to disclose
defects.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED |
Stephen J. Holtman, Leonard T. Strand, and Jason M. Steffens of Simmons, Perrine, Albright
& Ellwood, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant.
Sean W. McPartland of Lynch Dallas, P.C., Cedar Rapids, for
appellees. |
|
|
| Summary |
Full Opinion |
03-0470
NEXT GENERATION REALTY, INC. v. IOWA REALTY CO.
ppeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Glenn E. Pille, Judge. AFFIRMED. |
| Defendants, Iowa Realty Company, Inc. and First
Realty (Iowa Realty defendants), are members of defendant Des Moines Area Association of
Realtors (DMAAR), a professional association of real estate agencies that offers members
the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) for listing and selling residential real estate. Plaintiff, Next Generation Realty, Inc., was a DMAAR
member until it was expelled for not reporting or paying fees to DMAAR for office
exclusive listings. Next Generation protested the
fees because it dealt almost entirely with exclusive listings and seldom used the MLS for
its clients' listings. In this antitrust suit,
plaintiffs' claims are grounded in two Iowa statutes. Under
Iowa Code section 553.4 (2003), they claim Iowa Realty defendants conspired to take
control of DMAAR through an unorthodox election and conspired to expel plaintiffs from
DMAAR and its MLS. They append an assertion to this
claim to allege horizontal price-fixing. The claim
under Iowa Code section 553.5 is that defendants engaged in a monopolistic practice by
refusing to share MLS real estate commissions with them. The
trial court dismissed the petition. Plaintiffs
appealed. OPINION HOLDS: I. There was no antitrust injury, and without an antitrust
injury, the provisions of Iowa Code chapter 553 do not apply. Antitrust laws were not intended to deal with claimed
wrongs inflicted on individual parties. Their
function is only to foster the public's access to a freely competitive market. The record here contains no hint that the public was
inhibited from access to services of real estate brokers. II. The trial court correctly rejected plaintiffs'
price-fixing contention because that contention lacked any support in the record. The practice of splitting a 7% commission was
established many years ago in the Des Moines business community, and there is no
suggestion that the defendants in any way took part in originating the practice or
furthering its continuance. The petition was
correctly dismissed. |
|
| 03-372. [63], Filed June 16, 2004 |
| Summary |
Full Opinion |
|
| GREGORY O. FRANICH,
Appellant, vs. THE REAL ESTATE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF IOWA, Appellee. |
Appeal from
the Iowa District Court for Scott County, J. Hobart Darbyshire, Judge.Licensed real estate
broker appeals district court judgment affirming Commission’s permanent prohibition
of broker’s marketing plan. AFFIRMED.
Opinion by Ternus, J. |
| Gregory Franich is a
licensed real estate broker in the Quad Cities and the owner of Symmetry Mortgage
Corporation, a licensed real estate firm. Both are
licensed in Illinois and Iowa. As a mortgage
broker, Symmetry Mortgage obtains financing from one of three institutions that loan money
to its clients and pay a broker's commission to Symmetry Mortgage. It also operates a real estate brokerage business under
the trade name of Symmetry Real Estate. The
marketing plan at issue in this proceeding involves the relationship between the mortgage
financing offered by Symmetry Mortgage and the real estate brokerage services offered by
Franich d/b/a Symmetry Real Estate. By forgoing its mortgage broker commission, Symmetry
Mortgage offers interest rates below regular market rates to home buyers who use Franich's
brokerage services for the transaction. This
marketing strategy is advantageous to Franich because his real estate broker's commission
is much higher than Symmetry Mortgage's mortgage broker commission. The Iowa Real Estate Commission received a complaint
alleging that Franich, while acting as a mortgage broker for Symmetry Mortgage, offered a
lower rate to a potential borrower, M.B., if M.B. would change realty companies and hire
Symmetry Real Estate. Franich contended he
mentioned that this option existed only if the property purchased was in Illinois. Franich conceded, however, that he offered the reduced
rate mortgage proposal to potential Iowa clients through his website, which did not limit
this opportunity to Illinois property. The
Commission found such an offer violated Iowa Administrative Code rule 193E—1.31(6),
(7), defining prohibited practices that are deemed unethical or harmful or detrimental to
the public within the meaning of Iowa Code section 543B.29(3). The Commission permanently prohibited the tying
arrangement proposed by Franich. The Commission's
decision was affirmed by the district court on judicial review, and Franich appeals. OPINION HOLDS |
| o. 03-282. [62], Filed June 16,
2004 |
| Summary |
Full Opinion |
|
| RICKY
SEDGWICK and JANET SEDGWICK, Appellants, vs. JOEL A. BOWERS, Individually and as Trustee
of the J.A. & M.E. BOWERS LIVING TRUST dated June 14, 1999; MARY ELLEN BOWERS,
Individually and as Trustee of the J.A. & M.E. BOWERS LIVING TRUST dated June 14,
1999; and ASSOCIATES RELOCATION MANAGEMENT CO., INC., A Colorado Corporation, Appellees. |
| Appeal
from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, James C. Bauch, Judge. Affirmed
in Part And Reversed in Part. Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer
and Vaitheswaran, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. |
Ricky
and Janet Sedgwick had water problems in their Bettendorf home soon after they bought it
in November 2000. They investigated and found the
prior occupants, defendants, Joel and Mary Ellen Bowers, had also had water problems. However, when the Bowers sold the house, they had
falsely represented in their disclosure statements required by Iowa Code section 558A.2(1)
(1999) that they had never had water problems. Sedgwicks
sued Bowers, as well as Associates Relocation Management Company, Inc., an intermediate
buyer. The district court ultimately dismissed the
action, and the plaintiffs appealed. OPINION HOLDS
|
No. 2-895 / 02-0166
Filed March 12, 2003 |
Summary |
Full Opinion |
|
Galen
Beitz and Eleanor Beitz,Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs.
James P. Bailey and Jeanann R. Bailey,
Defendants-Appellees. |
| Appeal from
the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, James C. Bauch, Judge. Affirmed in
Part And Reversed in Part. Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer
and Vaitheswaran, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. |
| Two landowners
disputed the ownership of a small parcel adjacent to the Maquoketa River. The district
court concluded the rightful owner was the legal titleholder, dismissing the defendant's
claims of adverse possession and awarding the plaintiffs both attorney fees and a portion
of the survey costs. Opinion Holds: The plaintiffs were unable to
establish adverse possession of the parcel with clear and positive proof. The attorney
fees, however, are not taxable as ordinary costs, and the plaintiffs should not have been
required to pay a portion of the survey costs. |
No. 00-1254 [40]
Filed May 8, 2002 |
Summary |
Full Opinion |
Top of Page |
| AL-KHATTAT v.
ENG'G & LAND SURVEYING EXAMINING BD. |
| General
case description: The plaintiff appeals from a district court ruling on judicial review
affirming the engineering board's decision denying the plaintiff's application for comity
licensure. He contends the district court erred in affirming the board's decision, which
he claims was erroneous, unsupported by substantial evidence, unreasonable, arbitrary and
capricious, and involved a failure to exercise discretion. |
No. 00-119. [209]
Filed January 18, 2001 |
Summary |
Full Opinion |
Top of Page |
| MAX 100 L.C.
d/b/a RE/MAX 100, an Iowa L.C., NEXT GENERATION REALTY, INC., an Iowa Corporation, and
HOMEBUYERS CONSULTANTS, an Iowa Corporation, Appellees, vs. IOWA REALTY COMPANY, INC., an
Iowa Corporation d/b/a IOWA REALTY, and FIRST REALTY, LTD., an Iowa Corporation d/b/a
FIRST REALTY, Appellants, MIDAMERICAN ENERGY, an Iowa Corporation, Defendant. |
No. 99-448. [229] Filed
January 18, 2001 |
Summary |
Full Opinion |
Top of Page |
| PANDA
ENGINEERING, Appellant, vs. ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING EXAMINING BOARD OF THE STATE OF
IOWA, Appellee. |
|
|
