Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
30 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 2013–2024 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Marriage of Hansengreen2 sentences2024Our supreme court has identified “a nonexclusive list of factors” to consider in determining whether a joint-physical-care arrangement will serve the child’s best interests: (1) “approximation”—what has been the historical care giving arrangement for the child between the two parties; (2) the ability of the spouses to communicate and show mutual respect; (3) the degree of conflict between the parents; and (4) “the degree to which 5 the parents are in general agreement about their approach to daily matters.” In re Marriage of Berning, 745 N.W.2d 90, 92 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007) (quoting In re Marria 2016In determining what custodial arrangement is in T.H.’s best interests, we consider the nonexclusive list of factors enumerated in Iowa Code section 598.41(3) and Hansen, 733 N.W.2d at 696 . | 10 | 21 |
In Re the Marriage of Berninggreen2 sentences2024Our supreme court has identified “a nonexclusive list of factors” to consider in determining whether a joint-physical-care arrangement will serve the child’s best interests: (1) “approximation”—what has been the historical care giving arrangement for the child between the two parties; (2) the ability of the spouses to communicate and show mutual respect; (3) the degree of conflict between the parents; and (4) “the degree to which 5 the parents are in general agreement about their approach to daily matters.” In re Marriage of Berning, 745 N.W.2d 90, 92 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007) (quoting In re Marria 2021Caselaw provides “a nonexclusive list of factors to be considered when determining whether a joint physical care arrangement is in the best interest[ ] of the child.” In re Marriage of Berning, 745 N.W.2d 90, 92 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007). | 7 | 7 |
In Re the Marriage of Wintergreen2 sentences2017Our law provides a nonexclusive list of factors the court shall consider in determining a custodial arrangement, see Iowa Code § 598.41 (3),1 as well as nonstatutory factors, see In re Marriage of Will, 489 N.W.2d 394, 398 (Iowa 1992) (noting the factors from In re Marriage of Winter, 223 N.W.2d 165, 166-67 (Iowa 1974)).2 1 Iowa Code section 598.41(3) provides “the court shall consider the following factors” in making a custody determination: a. 2017Our law provides a nonexclusive list of factors the court shall consider in determining a custodial arrangement, see Iowa Code § 598.41 (3), as well as nonstatutory factors, see Will, 489 N.W.2d at 398 (citing In re Marriage of Winter, 223 N.W.2d 165 , 166–67 (Iowa 1974)). | 2 | 4 |
Mandy Kay Hensch v. Nicholas Allen Mysakgreen2 sentences2020The factors are (1) “approximation”—what has been the historical care giving arrangement for the child between the two parties; (2) the ability of the spouses to communicate and show mutual respect; (3) the degree of conflict between the parents; and (4) “the degree to which the parents are in general agreement about their approach to daily matters.” Id. (quoting Hansen, 733 N.W.2d at 697–99); see also Hensch v. Mysak, 902 N.W.2d 822 , 824–25 (Iowa Ct. App. 2017) (same). 2019We consider a nonexclusive list of factors to determine “whether a joint physical care arrangement is in the best interests of the child[ren].” Hensch v. Mysak, 902 N.W.2d 822, 824 (Iowa Ct. App. 2017) (quoting In re Marriage of Berning, 745 N.W.2d 90, 92 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007)). | 2 | 2 |
Kahn v. Griffingreen2 sentences2015The cited decisions predated that court’s use of a nonexclusive list of factors for departing from federal precedent beginning in Kahn v. Griffin, 701 N.W.2d 815, 829 (Minn. 2005). 2015The cited decisions predated that court’s use of a nonexclusive list of factors for departing from federal precedent beginning in Kahn v. Griffin, 701 N.W.2d 815, 829 (Minn.2005). | 2 | 2 |
In Re the Marriage of Willgreen2 sentences2017Our law provides a nonexclusive list of factors the court shall consider in determining a custodial arrangement, see Iowa Code § 598.41 (3),1 as well as nonstatutory factors, see In re Marriage of Will, 489 N.W.2d 394, 398 (Iowa 1992) (noting the factors from In re Marriage of Winter, 223 N.W.2d 165, 166-67 (Iowa 1974)).2 1 Iowa Code section 598.41(3) provides “the court shall consider the following factors” in making a custody determination: a. 2017Our law provides a nonexclusive list of factors the court shall consider in determining a custodial arrangement, see Iowa Code § 598.41 (3), as well as nonstatutory factors, see Will, 489 N.W.2d at 398 (citing In re Marriage of Winter, 223 N.W.2d 165 , 166–67 (Iowa 1974)). | 1 | 3 |
In Re the Marriage of Ellerbroekgreen1 sentence2021See Ellerbroek, 377 N.W.2d at 258 (noting that children might manipulate the parents if allowed control over the choice, respond to a parent’s needs and not his or her own, or may have other reasons for a choice unknown to the court). 11 In the end, when we examine the legislature’s nonexclusive list of factors, several factors tip the scale towards Melissa. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State of Iowa v. Donald Benjamin Earl Reed
green
2 sentences2016Id. at 705-06 . 2016The nonexclusive list of factors to be considered in determining whether a defendant possessed a firearm discovered in a jointly- occupied structure includes: “(1) incriminating statements made by a person; (2) incriminating actions of the person upon the police’s discovery of a [firearm] among or near the person’s personal belongings; (3) the person’s fingerprints on the packages containing the [firearm]; and (4) any other circumstances linking the person to the [firearm].” Id. at 706 . | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Joseph W. Democko, Donald Jones and James Samis v. Iowa Department of Natural Resources
green
1 sentence2017In determining whether a person is a resident having a principal and primary residence in Iowa, the statute contains “a nonexclusive list of factors, and thus requires the use of a multifactor, totality-of-the-circumstances approach.” Democko, 840 N.W.2d at 290 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.