Iowa Code » Chapter 669 — STATE TORT CLAIMS
Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 669.5 (2026)

When suit permitted — employees of the state

✓ Iowa Code 2026 (laws through the 2025 session)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IA-LEGlegis.iowa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1. A suit shall not be permitted for a claim under this chapter unless the attorney general has made final disposition of the claim. However, if the attorney general does not make final disposition of a claim within six months after the claim is made in writing to the director of the department of management, the claimant may, by notice in writing, withdraw the claim from consideration and begin suit under this chapter. Disposition of or offer to settle any claim made under this chapter shall not be competent evidence of liability or amount of damages in any suit under this chapter.

2. a. Upon certification by the attorney general that a defendant in a suit was an employee of the state acting within the scope of the employee’s office or employment at the time of the incident upon which the claim is based, the suit commenced upon the claim shall be deemed to be an action against the state under the provisions of this chapter, and if the state is not already a defendant, the state shall be substituted as the defendant in place of the employee.

b. If the attorney general refuses to certify that a defendant was acting within the scope of the defendant’s office or employment as described in paragraph “a” at the time of the incident out of which the claim arose, the defendant may petition the court, with notice to the attorney general, for the court to find and certify that the defendant was an employee of the state and was acting within the scope of the defendant’s office or employment. The defendant must file the petition within ninety days of the date the attorney general serves notice of the attorney general’s refusal to provide certification as provided in paragraph “a”. If the court issues the finding and certification, the suit shall be deemed to be brought against the state and subject to the provisions of this chapter and the state shall be substituted as the defendant party unless the state is already a defendant. If the court denies the petition for certification, the order shall not be a final order and is not subject to interlocutory appeal by the defendant. [C66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §25A.5] C93, §669.5 2006 Acts, ch 1185, §107 Referred to in §669.13, 669.21 \n

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 62 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: Paula Segura v. State of Iowa, 889 N.W.2d 215 (Iowa 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Paula Segura v. State of Iowa, 889 N.W.2d 215 (Iowa 2017). · cites it 75× “Iowa Code § 669.5 (1) (2013); see also Feltes v.”
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). · cites it 128× “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
Phillip E. Jones v. Univ. of Iowa the Bd. of Regents for the State of Iowa Sally Mason, 836 N.W.2d 127 (Iowa 2013). · cites it 19× “Iowa Code § 669.5 (2) (2009); see also Dickerson v.”
Dennis L. Smith v. Iowa State Univ. of Sci. & Tech. & State of Iowa, 851 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2014). · cites it 18× “See Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a). ISU and the board of regents also filed a motion to dismiss the breach of contract claim, which was granted on the basis that Smith had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies related to that claim.”
Terri Rivera v. Woodward Resource Ctr. & State of Iowa, 830 N.W.2d 724 (Iowa 2013). · cites it 18× “Notwithstanding, the State argues Rivera’s claim alleged a tort against the State, and it necessarily fell within the definition of a “claim” under the Act.”
Casey Mcgill Ginger L. Mcgill Ashlea D. Mcgill v. Ben Fish, 790 N.W.2d 113 (Iowa 2010). · cites it 10× “Iowa Code § 669.5 . They assert this procedural determination under the ITCA would act to bar further proceedings because section 85.”
Iowa Beta Chapter of Phi Delta Theta Fraternity v. State, Univ. of Iowa, 763 N.W.2d 250 (Iowa 2009). · cites it 14× “Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a l. 1 The legislature added this section to the Code during the 2006 legislative session, effective July 1, 2006.”
Kevin Walker v. State of Iowa, 801 N.W.2d 548 (Iowa 2011). · cites it 8× “See Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2007) (substituting the state for defendant where defendant in a suit was an employee of the state acting within the scope of the employee’s employment at the time of the incident upon which the claim is based).”
Vania Minor v. State of Iowa, 819 N.W.2d 383 (Iowa 2012). · cites it 6× “” Iowa Code § 669.5 . 8 Section 669.13 provides, “[e]very claim and suit permitted under this chapter shall be forever barred, unless within two years after such claim accrued, the claim is made in writing to the state appeal board under this chapter.”
Gregory Baldwin v. City of Estherville, 915 N.W.2d 259 (Iowa 2018). · cites it 4× “885 , 890 (2014); Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a); id. § 670.8. But the indemnitor has the ability and the motive to influence the indemnitee’s behavior.”
Pamela Sue Hook v. Tito Trevino, 839 N.W.2d 434 (Iowa 2013). · cites it 6× “Iowa Code § 669.5 . Iowa Code section 669.”
Christopher J. Godfrey v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 898 N.W.2d 844 (Iowa 2017). · cites it 2× “94 damages, and I am not aware of an Iowa court having refused to honor this limit.”
Show all 62 citing cases →
Iowa Code § 669.5(1): 15 cases
Paula Segura v. State of Iowa, 889 N.W.2d 215 (Iowa 2017). “Iowa Code § 669.5 (1) (2013); see also Feltes v.”
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
Terri Rivera v. Woodward Resource Ctr. & State of Iowa, 830 N.W.2d 724 (Iowa 2013). “Notwithstanding, the State argues Rivera’s claim alleged a tort against the State, and it necessarily fell within the definition of a “claim” under the Act.”
Casey Mcgill Ginger L. Mcgill Ashlea D. Mcgill v. Ben Fish, 790 N.W.2d 113 (Iowa 2010). “Iowa Code § 669.5 . They assert this procedural determination under the ITCA would act to bar further proceedings because section 85.”
McCabe v. MacAulay, 551 F. Supp. 2d 771 (N.D. Iowa 2007).
Iowa Code § 669.5(2): 9 cases
Kevin Walker v. State of Iowa, 801 N.W.2d 548 (Iowa 2011). “See Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2007) (substituting the state for defendant where defendant in a suit was an employee of the state acting within the scope of the employee’s employment at the time of the incident upon which the claim is based).”
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
Casey Mcgill Ginger L. Mcgill Ashlea D. Mcgill v. Ben Fish, 790 N.W.2d 113 (Iowa 2010). “Iowa Code § 669.5 . They assert this procedural determination under the ITCA would act to bar further proceedings because section 85.”
Mills v. Iowa Bd. of Regents, 770 F. Supp. 2d 986 (S.D. Iowa 2011).
Sara Montague v. Beth Skinner, 30 N.W.3d 213 (Iowa 2026).
Iowa Code § 669.5(2)(6): 2 cases
Phillip E. Jones v. Univ. of Iowa the Bd. of Regents for the State of Iowa Sally Mason, 836 N.W.2d 127 (Iowa 2013). “Iowa Code § 669.5 (2) (2009); see also Dickerson v.”
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
Iowa Code § 669.5(2)(a): 20 cases
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
Dennis L. Smith v. Iowa State Univ. of Sci. & Tech. & State of Iowa, 851 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2014). “See Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a). ISU and the board of regents also filed a motion to dismiss the breach of contract claim, which was granted on the basis that Smith had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies related to that claim.”
Paula Segura v. State of Iowa, 889 N.W.2d 215 (Iowa 2017). “Iowa Code § 669.5 (1) (2013); see also Feltes v.”
Christopher J. Godfrey v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 898 N.W.2d 844 (Iowa 2017). “94 damages, and I am not aware of an Iowa court having refused to honor this limit.”
Phillip E. Jones v. Univ. of Iowa the Bd. of Regents for the State of Iowa Sally Mason, 836 N.W.2d 127 (Iowa 2013). “Iowa Code § 669.5 (2) (2009); see also Dickerson v.”
Iowa Code § 669.5(2)(b): 4 cases
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
Casey Mcgill Ginger L. Mcgill Ashlea D. Mcgill v. Ben Fish, 790 N.W.2d 113 (Iowa 2010). “Iowa Code § 669.5 . They assert this procedural determination under the ITCA would act to bar further proceedings because section 85.”
Mills v. Iowa Bd. of Regents, 770 F. Supp. 2d 986 (S.D. Iowa 2011).
Christopher J. Godfrey v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, No. 12–2120 (Iowa June 6, 2014).
Iowa Code § 669.5(2)(u): 1 case
Amended August 20 v. State of Iowa Terry Branstad, 847 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2014). “1185, § 107 (codified at Iowa Code § 669.5 (2)(a) (2008)). The language of the certification provision is similar to the language used by Congress in the Westfall Act.”
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.