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.
12 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1955–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodsongreen2 sentences2014See Worldr-Wide Volkswagen Corp., 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. at 564 , 62 L.Ed.2d at 498 (stating the burden on the defendant is “always a primary concern” among the other fairness factors). 2014See Worldr-Wide Volkswagen Corp., 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. at 564 , 62 L.Ed.2d at 498 (stating the burden on the defendant is “always a primary concern” among the other fairness factors). | 1 | 2 |
In Re Estate of Northupgreen1 sentence2025See Evjen, 372 N.W.2d at 499 (citing Northup, 230 N.W.2d at 922–23). | 1 | 1 |
Evjen v. Brooksgreen1 sentence2025See Evjen, 372 N.W.2d at 499 (citing Northup, 230 N.W.2d at 922–23). | 1 | 1 |
Harding v. Dana Transport, Inc.green1 sentence2021Fenceroy v. Gelita USA, Inc., 908 N.W.2d 235 , 243–44 (Iowa 2018) (citing Harding v. Dana Transport, Inc., 914 F. Supp. 1084, 1096 (D.N.J. 1996)). | 1 | 1 |
FAIRFIELD COM. SCHOOL DIST. v. Justmanngreen2 sentences2014In the context of due process in adjudicative proceedings before school boards, the presumption of objectivity and impartiality in contested cases “will typically be determinative of the bias issue” and can only be overcome by “direct, compelling evidence to the contrary.” Bd. of Dirs. v. Justmann, 476 N.W.2d 335, 340 (Iowa 1991). 2014In the context of due process in adjudicative proceedings before school boards, the presumption of objectivity and impartiality in contested cases “will typically be determinative of the bias issue” and can only be overcome by “direct, compelling evidence to the contrary.” Bd. of Dirs. v. Just-mann, 476 N.W.2d 335, 340 (Iowa 1991). | 1 | 1 |
Widoff v. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Courtgreen1 sentence2001Id. at 46 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. William Lawrence White, Jr., A/K/A Billy Whitegreen1 sentence1988White, 488 F.2d at 662 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Oliver Fenceroy v. Gelita USA, Inc., Tom Haire, and Jeff Tolsma
green
1 sentence2021Fenceroy v. Gelita USA, Inc., 908 N.W.2d 235 , 243–44 (Iowa 2018) (citing Harding v. Dana Transport, Inc., 914 F. Supp. 1084, 1096 (D.N.J. 1996)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Anstey v. Iowa State Commerce Commission
green
2 sentences2014After all, a claim of bias in the context of contested cases “becomes a justiciable issue only as it bears on the fairness of the hearing.” Anstey, 292 N.W.2d at 390 . 2014After all, a claim of bias in the context of contested cases “becomes a justiciable issue only as it bears on the fairness of the hearing.” Anstey, 292 N.W.2d at 390 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Botsko v. Davenport Civil Rights Commission
green
1 sentence2014In Botsko, an employer was challenging the fairness of the hearing it received before the city’s civil rights commission, which had found the employer had discriminated against an employee. 774 N.W.2d at 843 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Petrovic v. Amoco Oil Co.
green
1 sentence2003It “unquestionably alerted the recipients that they were members of a pending class action, that a settlement had been proposed, and that they had the right to state their objections at a fairness hearing.” Petrovic, 200 F.3d at 1153 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Cedar Rapids Steel Transportation, Inc. v. Iowa State Commerce Commission
green
1 sentence1980“It cannot be imputed to the fact-trier retroactively, as it were, because his mind has absorbed the impressions left by a full and fair hearing.” 160 N.W.2d at 837 (quoting A. O. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
cluster 267293
green
1 sentence1968B. (7 Cir.), 343 F.2d 103 , 110: * * Bias or prejudice or hostility becomes a justiciable issue only as it bears on the fairness of the hearing. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
State v. Smith
neutral
2 sentences1955I. 46, 78 A.2d 793 ]. # * * A substantially fair trial will be upheld in either case.” While it is so that in State v. Smith, 199 Iowa 568, 569 , 202 N.W. 112 , this court said: “It is true that, in one or two instances, this court has reversed on the general ground that de-. fendant had not had a fair and impartial trial, by reason of inefficiency of counsel;” we have failed to discover such Iowa cases, and thej'' were not furnished us by appellant’s counsel. 1955I. 46, 78 A.2d 793 ]. # * * A substantially fair trial will be upheld in either case.” While it is so that in State v. Smith, 199 Iowa 568, 569 , 202 N.W. 112 , this court said: “It is true that, in one or two instances, this court has reversed on the general ground that de-. fendant had not had a fair and impartial trial, by reason of inefficiency of counsel;” we have failed to discover such Iowa cases, and thej'' were not furnished us by appellant’s counsel. | 1 | 1955–1955 |
Ingram v. State
neutral
2 sentences1955Rev. 1125 ) but the great majority of such claims are denied on the ground that substantial justice was done, (Ingram v. State (1951), 230 Ind. 25 , 99 N.E.2d 410 ), or on the more specific ground that incompetence was not proved or was not so gross that it destroyed the fairness of the hearing [citing many cases including State v. Lee (1951), 78 R. 1955Rev. 1125 ) but the great majority of such claims are denied on the ground that substantial justice was done, (Ingram v. State (1951), 230 Ind. 25 , 99 N.E.2d 410 ), or on the more specific ground that incompetence was not proved or was not so gross that it destroyed the fairness of the hearing [citing many cases including State v. Lee (1951), 78 R. | 1 | 1955–1955 |
State v. Lee
neutral
1 sentence1955I. 46, 78 A.2d 793 ]. # * * A substantially fair trial will be upheld in either case.” While it is so that in State v. Smith, 199 Iowa 568, 569 , 202 N.W. 112 , this court said: “It is true that, in one or two instances, this court has reversed on the general ground that de-. fendant had not had a fair and impartial trial, by reason of inefficiency of counsel;” we have failed to discover such Iowa cases, and thej'' were not furnished us by appellant’s counsel. | 1 | 1955–1955 |
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.