21 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2022 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Charles Furnald v. Anthony Hughes and Emcasco Insurance Companygreen2 sentences2013See Furnald, 804 N.W.2d at 276 (recognizing the purpose of a savings clause is to allow a diligent plaintiff the chance to renew a suit dismissed on grounds other than the merits). 2013See Furnald v. Hughes, 804 N.W.2d 273, 276 (Iowa 2011) (stating the purpose of a savings clause “is to prevent minor or technical mistakes from precluding a plaintiff from obtaining his day in court”). | 3 | 3 |
Hamdan v. Rumsfeldgreen2 sentences2022See Hamdan, 548 U.S. at 576– 77. 2022See Hamdan, 548 U.S. at 576– 77. | 2 | 2 |
Hertz v. Woodmangreen2 sentences2022The savings clause requires “such statute” to be treated as remaining in force to sustain “any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture, or liability.” Id.; see United States v. McNair, 180 F.2d 273, 274 (9th Cir. 1950) (“[S]ection [109] . . . extends . . . to ‘liabilities,’ and a liability or obligation to pay a tax imposed under a repealed 15 statute is not only within the letter, but the spirit and purpose of the provision.” (emphasis added) (quoting Hertz v. Woodman, 218 U.S. 205, 217 (1910))). 2022The savings clause requires “such statute” to be treated as remaining in force to sustain “any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture, or liability.” Id.; see United States v. McNair, 180 F.2d 273, 274 (9th Cir. 1950) (“[S]ection [109] . . . extends . . . to ‘liabilities,’ and a liability or obligation to pay a tax imposed under a repealed 15 statute is not only within the letter, but the spirit and purpose of the provision.” (emphasis added) (quoting Hertz v. Woodman, 218 U.S. 205, 217 (1910))). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. McNairgreen2 sentences2022The savings clause requires “such statute” to be treated as remaining in force to sustain “any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture, or liability.” Id.; see United States v. McNair, 180 F.2d 273, 274 (9th Cir. 1950) (“[S]ection [109] . . . extends . . . to ‘liabilities,’ and a liability or obligation to pay a tax imposed under a repealed 15 statute is not only within the letter, but the spirit and purpose of the provision.” (emphasis added) (quoting Hertz v. Woodman, 218 U.S. 205, 217 (1910))). 2022The savings clause requires “such statute” to be treated as remaining in force to sustain “any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture, or liability.” Id.; see United States v. McNair, 180 F.2d 273, 274 (9th Cir. 1950) (“[S]ection [109] . . . extends . . . to ‘liabilities,’ and a liability or obligation to pay a tax imposed under a repealed 15 statute is not only within the letter, but the spirit and purpose of the provision.” (emphasis added) (quoting Hertz v. Woodman, 218 U.S. 205, 217 (1910))). | 2 | 2 |
Terri Rivera v. Woodward Resource Center and State of Iowagreen2 sentences2021Allen Invs., Inc., 956 N.W.2d 489 , 491–92 (Iowa 2021) (resorting to context-specific analysis when “landlord” was statutorily defined as “the owner, lessor, or sublessor” and it was unclear whether both an owner and lessor could be a landlord at same time); Rivera, 830 N.W.2d at 730 (finding “the context of the savings clause does not require the term ‘claim’ to take on a meaning different from the statutory definition” because there was no ambiguity after applying its intended meaning). 2016In Rivera v. Woodward Resource Center, the Iowa Supreme Court identified the three requirements that must be met before section 669.13’s savings clause will extend the statute of limitations: “(I) a timely ‘claim’ must be made or filed, (2) the claim must be made under a law of this state other than under chapter 669, and (3) an agency or court must make a determination that chapter 669 is the exclusive remedy for the claim.” [ 830 N.W.2d 724, 729 (Iowa 2013).] Plaintiff has failed to persuade the court that the savings clause of 614.10 applies to actions under chapter 669 despite section 669. | 2 | 2 |
Geier v. American Honda Motor Co.green2 sentences2014See Geier, 529 U.S. at 869 , 120 S.Ct. at 1919 , 146 L.Ed.2d at 924 ; Pokorny v. Ford Motor Co., 902 F.2d 1116, 1125 (3d Cir.1990). 2014See Geier, 529 U.S. at 869 , 120 S.Ct. at 1919 , 146 L.Ed.2d at 924 ; Pokorny v. Ford Motor Co., 902 F.2d 1116, 1125 (3d Cir.1990). | 2 | 2 |
Iowa Department of Social Services v. Reddgreen2 sentences1999Id. 1998Hoover, 251 N.W.2d at 530 . | 1 | 3 |
Iowa Department of Transportation v. Iowa District Court for Scott Countygreen1 sentence2022The court similarly declined to apply the provision in Iowa District Court for Scott County, reasoning the defendants “had no remedy ‘with respect to any privilege’ within the meaning of section 4.13[(1)(d)]” and “[c]onsequently, that statute [could not] save the purported ‘remedy.’” 587 N.W.2d 781, 785 (Iowa 1998). | 1 | 1 |
State of Florida v. Anthony Duwayne Horsley, Jr.green2 sentences2015It noted that the savings clause was meant to “require the statute in effect at the time of the crime to govern the sentence an offender receives.” Id. 2015It noted that the savings clause was meant to “require the statute in effect at the time of the crime to govern the sentence an offender receives.” Id. | 1 | 1 |
Anne Duffy Pokorny, Administratrix of the Estate of John Duffy, Deceased v. Ford Motor Companygreen1 sentence2014See Geier, 529 U.S. at 869 , 120 S.Ct. at 1919 , 146 L.Ed.2d at 924 ; Pokorny v. Ford Motor Co., 902 F.2d 1116, 1125 (3d Cir.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Zimmer v. Vander Waalgreen2 sentences2013See Zimmer, 780 N.W.2d at 733 . 2013See Zimmer, 780 N.W.2d at 733 . | 1 | 1 |
Gaines v. . City of New Yorkgreen2 sentences2011Gaines v. City of New York, 215 N.Y. 533 , 109 N.E. 594, 595 (1915). 2011Gaines v. City of New York, 215 N.Y. 533 , 109 N.E. 594, 595 (1915). | 1 | 1 |
Carroll v. Martirgreen1 sentence2001See Carroll v. Martir, 610 N.W.2d 850, 857 (Iowa 2000) (holding that, until the district court has rendered a final order or decree, it has the power to correct any of the rulings, orders or partial summary judgments it has entered). | 1 | 1 |
Buchhop v. General Growth Properties & General Growth Management Corp.green1 sentence1983In re Estate of Hoover, 251 N.W.2d 529, 530 (Iowa 1977); Buchhop v. General Growth Properties and General Growth Management Corp., 235 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Iowa 1975); 1A C. | 1 | 1 |
Garrison v. Garrisongreen1 sentence1977See Garrison v. Garrison, 179 N.W.2d 466, 468 (Iowa 1970). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wiesegreen1 sentence1973If the offense being prosecuted is similar to one set out in division IV of this Act then the penalties under division IV shall apply if they are less than those under prior law.” “ * * * It is evident from the language of the savings clause * * * [in *893 the last above quoted portion of the legislative enactment] that the legislature intended to make its penalties applicable to all future sentences where they were less than those in the old statute. * * * The new statute could apply in every case involving a similar charge under the statutes in which valid sentence had not been pronounced as | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wieslander v. Iowa Department of Transportation
green
1 sentence2022Instead, the State relies on a different savings clause—Iowa Code section 4.13(1)(d), which states the repeal of a statute does not affect: “Any investigation, proceeding, or remedy in respect of any privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture, or punishment; and the investigation, proceeding, or remedy may be instituted, continued, or enforced, and the penalty, forfeiture, or punishment imposed, as if the statute had not been repealed or amended.” In Wieslander, the court declined to apply this savings clause because the appellant “had no pending action under section [4.13(1)(d)] at | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Easterwood v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
green
1 sentence2021The Easterwood Court rejected the application of the savings clause in the case, noting that the common law of negligence was “a general rule [addressing] all hazards caused by lack of due care, not just those owing to unique local conditions.” Id. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Jackim v. CC-Lake, Inc.
green
2 sentences2019Indeed, the Jackim court found the absence of such a statement in the Illinois statute important, stating, “If the Illinois legislature intended for entrance fees paid by residents to providers in 33 connection with life care contracts to be subject to the Security Deposit Interest Act, it could have said so . . . .” Id. 2019Indeed, the Jackim court found the absence of such a statement in the Illinois statute important, stating, "If the Illinois legislature intended for entrance fees paid by residents to providers in connection with life care contracts to be subject to the Security Deposit Interest Act, it could have said so ...." Id. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Drahaus v. State
green
2 sentences2013The State relies heavily on language from our opinion in Drahaus “point[ing] out that various provisions in chapter 669 . . . draw a distinction between the terms claim, action, and suit.” 584 N.W.2d at 274 . 2013The State relies heavily on language from our opinion in Drahaus “pointing] out that various provisions in chapter 669 ... draw a distinction between the terms claim, action, and suit.” 584 N.W.2d at 274 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Bensley v. State
green
2 sentences2013Id. at 446 . 2013Id. at 446 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Miller v. Hageman
neutral
2 sentences1998We found that the savings clause "was intended only to protect rights, not mere privileges." Miller, 114 Iowa at 201 , 86 N.W. at 283. 1998We found that the savings clause “was intended only to protect rights, not mere privileges.” Miller, 114 Iowa at 201 , 86 N.W. at 283. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Griffel v. Northern Natural Gas Company
green
2 sentences1972The amendment effective May 20, 1969 contained a savings clause, section 2 of the Act, which provided in material part: “In all condemnation proceedings pending on the effective date of this Act * * *, wherein the property owner has served a proper notice of appeal on the applicant for condemnation within the statutory period, but has failed to serve notice of appeal on a lienholder within the statutory period * * *, such failure shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction * * *, unless a lienholder can show prejudice thereby, and in such instances the appeal * * *, is legalized and validated. 1972The amendment effective May 20, 1969 contained a savings clause, section 2 of the Act, which provided in material part: “In all condemnation proceedings pending on the effective date of this Act * * *, wherein the property owner has served a proper notice of appeal on the applicant for condemnation within the statutory period, but has failed to serve notice of appeal on a lienholder within the statutory period * * *, such failure shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction * * *, unless a lienholder can show prejudice thereby, and in such instances the appeal * * *, is legalized and validated. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Carmichael v. Iowa State Highway Commission
green
1 sentence1972The amendment effective May 20, 1969 contained a savings clause, section 2 of the Act, which provided in material part: “In all condemnation proceedings pending on the effective date of this Act * * *, wherein the property owner has served a proper notice of appeal on the applicant for condemnation within the statutory period, but has failed to serve notice of appeal on a lienholder within the statutory period * * *, such failure shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction * * *, unless a lienholder can show prejudice thereby, and in such instances the appeal * * *, is legalized and validated. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
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.