Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 622.76 (2026)

Failure to attend or testify — liability

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IA-LEGlegis.iowa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

For a failure to obey a valid subpoena without a sufficient cause or excuse, or for a refusal to testify after appearance, the delinquent is guilty of a contempt of court and subject to be proceeded against by attachment. The delinquent is also liable to the party by whom the delinquent was subpoenaed for all consequences of such delinquency, with fifty dollars additional damages. [C51, §2418; R60, §4016; C73, §3675; C97, §4664; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §11333; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §622.76] Referred to in §622.79, 631.3 Contempts, chapter 665

\n
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1981–2012 · leading case: State of Iowa v. Allen Bradley Clay.
State of Iowa v. Allen Bradley Clay (Iowa 2012). · cites it 2× “, who separately concur specially. . Although VanEs did not appear, the prosecutor had the option of asking the court to continue the matter and compel the witness *501 to testify.”
Iowa Civil Rights Comm'n v. City of Des Moines/Pers. Dep't, 313 N.W.2d 491 (Iowa 1981). “Although enforcement of a subpoena in a civil action is confined primarily to a contempt of court action, see § 622.76, The Code, which was not sought here, enforcement of discovery under the rules of civil procedure provides the court with authority to compel discovery,…”
State v. Kite, 513 N.W.2d 720 (Iowa 1994). · cites it 2× “14; Iowa Code §§ 622.76 -.78, 622.102 (1993).”
State v. LaGrange, 541 N.W.2d 562 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “14(5); Iowa Code §§ 622.76 , 665.2(4) (1995). Finally, nothing in the record indicates whether Chevalier had conclusively determined whether or not to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights.”
UE Local 893/Iowa United Professionals v. Schmitz, 576 N.W.2d 357 (Iowa 1998). · cites it 4× “See Iowa Code § 622.76 . Schmitz resisted, contending the arbitrator lacked subpoena power, the records sought were confidential, and the Union had no right to subpoena personnel records of employees outside of the bargaining unit.”
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.