1. If a teacher rejects the board’s decision, the teacher shall, within thirty days of the initial filing of such decision, appeal to the district court of the county in which the administrative office of the school district is located. The notice of appeal shall be immediately mailed by certified mail to the board. The secretary of the board shall transmit to the reviewing court the original or a certified copy of the entire record which may be the subject of the petition.\n\nTue Dec 09 22:17:58 2025 Iowa Code 2026, Chapter 279 (98, 4) 13 DIRECTORS — POWERS AND DUTIES, §279.19\n\nBy stipulation of all parties to the review proceedings, the record of such a case may be shortened. A party unreasonably refusing to stipulate to limit the record may be taxed by the court for the additional cost. The court may require or permit subsequent corrections or additions to the shortened record.
2. In proceedings for judicial review of the board’s decision, the court shall not hear any further evidence but shall hear the case upon the certified record. In such judicial review, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, the court shall give weight to the decision of the board, but shall not be bound by it. The court may affirm the board’s decision or remand to the board for further proceedings upon conditions determined by the court. The court shall reverse, modify, or grant any other appropriate equitable or legal relief from the board decision, including declaratory relief, if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the action is any of the following:
a. In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.
b. In excess of the statutory authority of the board.
c. In violation of a board rule or policy or contract.
d. Made upon unlawful procedure.
e. Affected by other error of law.
f. Unsupported by a preponderance of the competent evidence in the record made before the board when that record is viewed as a whole.
g. Unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or a clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion.
3. An aggrieved or adversely affected party to the judicial review proceeding may obtain a review of any final judgment of the district court by appeal to the supreme court. The appeal shall be taken as in other civil cases, although the appeal may be taken regardless of the amount involved.
4. For purposes of this section, unless the context otherwise requires, “teacher” shall include but not be limited to an instructor employed by a community college. [C77, 79, 81, §279.18] 2002 Acts, ch 1047, §15; 2017 Acts, ch 2, §34, 48, 49 Referred to in §256.103, 256.160, 260C.39, 273.22, 275.33, 279.13, 279.16, 279.19B, 279.27 \n
Notes of Decisions
Olds v. Bd. of Educ. of Nashua Cmty. Sch. Dist., 334 N.W.2d 765 (Iowa Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 6× “Iowa Code § 279.18 . In this case the court concluded that Olds' termination violated the terms of the Board's master contract with the teachers.”
Walthart v. Bd. of Dirs. of Edco Sc. Dist., 694 N.W.2d 740 (Iowa 2005).
· cites it 2× “Iowa Code § 279.18 (“In proceedings for judicial review of the adjudicator’s decision, the court shall not hear any further evidence but shall hear the case upon the certified record.”
Everett v. Bd. of Educ. of the Hampton Cmty. Sch. Dist., 334 N.W.2d 320 (Iowa Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 5× “Iowa Code § 279.18 . Plaintiff's sole contention on appeal is that the decisions of the board and the adjudicator that just cause existed to terminate her contract were unsupported by a preponderance of the competent evidence in the record.”
Shenandoah Educ. Ass'n v. Shenandoah Cmty. Sch. Dist., 337 N.W.2d 477 (Iowa 1983).
· cites it 2× “" Iowa Code § 279.18 (3) (1981). In this case the decisions of the adjudicator and the trial court must be reversed because the board's action to terminate Gardner violated the negotiated agreement.”
Bd. of Directors of Fairfield Cmty. Sch. Dist. v. Justmann, 476 N.W.2d 335 (Iowa 1991).
· cites it 4× “” Iowa Code § 279.18 (6) (1991). Second, he argues that both the teacher termination process mandated by chapter 279 of the Iowa Code and the procedure observed in this particular case are violative of due process.”
Bd. of Dirs. of Ames Sc. Dist. v. Cullinan, 745 N.W.2d 487 (Iowa 2008).
· cites it 2× “Iowa Code § 279.18 . The statute does not state which decision is to be reviewed by the court — the adjudicator’s or the board’s.”
Libe v. Bd. of Educ. of Twin Cedars, 350 N.W.2d 748 (Iowa Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “In this case, no one contests the idea that plaintiff's alleged improper conduct, if proven by a preponderance of competent record evidence when the record is viewed as a whole ( see Iowa Code § 279.18 (6)), would constitute just cause justifying plaintiff's discharge under…”
Bd. of Directors v. Banke, 498 N.W.2d 697 (Iowa 1993).
“In such judicial review, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, the court shall give weight to the fact findings of the board; but shall not be bound by them. The court may reverse a school board’s or adjudicator’s decision if it finds that it was “unsupported…”
MacKey v. Newell-Providence Cmty. Sch. Dist., 483 N.W.2d 5 (Iowa Ct. App. 1992).
“Plaintiff contends it was error for the board and superintendent to consider comments of parents in making a competency evaluation because the collective bargaining agreement provided the decision should be made by the administrator.”
SAC City Bd. of Educ. v. Schermerhorn, 340 N.W.2d 789 (Iowa Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “In reviewing the decision of the district court, we are limited to the correction of errors under the standards set forth above in Iowa Code § 279.18 . Olds v. Board of Education of Nashua Community School District, 334 N.”
— Iowa Code § 279.18(6) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.