12 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2025 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Doe v. Iowa Board of Medical Examinersgreen2 sentences2021Id. at 709, 712 . 2021Id. at 709, 712 . | 2 | 2 |
Anderson Contracting, Inc. v. DSM Copolymers, Inc.green2 sentences2021Historically, Iowa case law provided, “The court will determine what weight, if any, to give to each of the listed factors.” Anderson, 776 N.W.2d at 848 . 2020There is no preordained hierarchy in the factors; the district court is charged with determining “what weight, if any, to give to each of the listed factors.” Anderson Contracting, Inc., 776 N.W.2d at 848–49. | 1 | 2 |
In Re Marriage of Fennelly & Breckenfeldergreen1 sentence2025In re Marriage of Fennelly, 737 N.W.2d 97, 102 (Iowa 2007). | 1 | 1 |
Comes v. Microsoft Corp.green1 sentence2021But 10 more recently, the Iowa Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of the “predominance factor” contained in rule 1.263(1)(e), which asks “[w]hether common questions of law or fact predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.” Compare Comes, 696 N.W.2d at 318 (“[The party challenging certification] contends a showing of predominance is a condition precedent to certification, but we disagree; this is only one of thirteen factors to be considered.”); with Roland, 940 N.W.2d at 759 (“We require that ‘common questions of law or fact predominate over any questions affec | 1 | 1 |
In Re Marriage of Beckergreen1 sentence2017See In re Marriage of Becker, 756 N.W.2d 822, 827 (Iowa 2008) (“[T]here is nothing in our case law that requires us, or any other court in this state, to award only one type of support.”). | 1 | 1 |
SAC City Board of Education v. Schermerhorngreen1 sentence1995Sac City Bd. of Educ. v. Schermerhorn, 340 N.W.2d 789, 790-91 (Iowa App.1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Marriage of Thomas
green
2 sentences2022Other considerations, like the length of the marriage, “may indirectly bear on the question for their effect on the listed factors.” Thomas, 319 N.W.2d at 211 . 2015“Other matters, such as the length of the marriage or the length of time the property was held after it was devised or given, though not independent factors, may indirectly bear on the question for their effect on the listed factors.” Id. | 4 | 2015–2022 |
United States v. Rafer Harrison
green
1 sentence2021It did not fit under a listed exception, but the court allowed its admission under the residual exception, stating that “the district court could properly rule that [the child’s] statement to [law enforcement] was the most probative available evidence with respect to the details not disclosed in her other statements.” Id. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Laurie Freeman, Sharon Mockmore, Beccy Boysel, Gary D. Boysel, Linda L. Goreham, Gary R. Goreham, Kelcey Brackett, and Bobbie Lynn Weatherman v. Grain Processing Corporation
green
1 sentence2021But 10 more recently, the Iowa Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of the “predominance factor” contained in rule 1.263(1)(e), which asks “[w]hether common questions of law or fact predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.” Compare Comes, 696 N.W.2d at 318 (“[The party challenging certification] contends a showing of predominance is a condition precedent to certification, but we disagree; this is only one of thirteen factors to be considered.”); with Roland, 940 N.W.2d at 759 (“We require that ‘common questions of law or fact predominate over any questions affec | 1 | 2021–2021 |
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.