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.
9 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2020 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
SUP. CT. BD. OF PROF'L ETHICS v. Faygreen2 sentences2007See Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof'l Ethics & Conduct v. Fay, 619 N.W.2d 321, 326 (Iowa 2000). 2007See Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof’l Ethics & Conduct v. Fay, 619 N.W.2d 321, 326 (Iowa 2000). | 2 | 2 |
Jensen v. Sattlergreen1 sentence2017A person who violates the disclosure requirement through “error, inaccuracy, or omission” of required information is liable to the transferee if “that person has actual knowledge of the inaccuracy, or fails to exercise ordinary care in obtaining the information.” Id. § 558A.6(1); see also Jensen v. Sattler, 696 N.W.2d 582, 587 (Iowa 2005) (finding showing of failure to exercise ordinary care, whether or not the seller lived on the property, to be sufficient). | 1 | 1 |
City of Dubuque v. Telegraph Herald, Inc.green1 sentence1992In City of Dubuque v. Telegraph Herald, Inc., 297 N.W.2d 523, 526-27 (Iowa 1980), we said the legislature intended for the disclosure requirement to be interpreted broadly, and for the confidentiality exception to be interpreted narrowly. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Doe v. Iowa State Board of Physical Therapy & Occupational Therapy Examiners
green
2 sentences2007In concluding that the disclosure exception did not allow disclosure of the complainant’s identity, we held that “the disclosure exception applies only when a disciplinary proceeding has been initiated.” Id. at 559 . 2007In concluding that the disclosure exception did not allow disclosure of the complainant’s identity, we held that “the disclosure exception applies only when a disciplinary proceeding has been initiated.” Id. at 559 . | 2 | 2007–2007 |
Brady v. Maryland
green
2 sentences1996Defendants argue the State’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence regarding Davis’ plea agreement violated the disclosure rule in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and further the resulting prejudice to defendants constitutes a ground for reversal. 1996Defendants argue the State’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence regarding Davis’ plea agreement violated the disclosure rule in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and further the resulting prejudice to defendants constitutes a ground for reversal. | 2 | 1988–1996 |
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., Humboldt Cty.
green
1 sentence2020And in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court, 542 U.S. 177 , 181–82, 187, 190–91, 125 S. Ct. 2451 , 2456, 2459, 2461 (2004), the Supreme Court found no Fifth Amendment violation when an individual was convicted of disobeying a law that required a detained person to “identify himself,” but also provided he “may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer.” The Court noted, 12 The narrow scope of the disclosure requirement is also important. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
City of Sioux City v. Greater Sioux City Press Club
green
1 sentence1992In Press Club, 421 N.W.2d at 897 , we explained that the so-called “narrow” construction of statutory exceptions from disclosure, outlined in Telegraph Herald, should not be overutilized. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.