Iowa Code » Chapter 68 — IMPEACHMENT
Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 68.1 (2026)

Impeachment defined

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

An impeachment is a written accusation against the governor, or a judicial officer, or other state officer, by the house of representatives before the senate, of a misdemeanor or malfeasance in office. [R60, §4937; C73, §4546; C97, §5469; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §1131; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §68.1] 83 Acts, ch 186, §10033, 10201

\n
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1977–2014 · leading case: Hunter v. City of Des Moines, 300 N.W.2d 121 (Iowa 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hunter v. City of Des Moines, 300 N.W.2d 121 (Iowa 1981). · cites it 4× “The circumstances to which consideration should be given include those enumerated in § 68.1 and also whether: (1) Treating the issue as conclusively determined would be incompatible with an applicable scheme of administering the remedies in the actions involved; (2) The forum in…”
Vill. Supply Co., Inc. v. Iowa Fund, Inc., 312 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1981). · cites it 4× “We have previously noted exceptions to the general rule of issue preclusion which are listed in Restatement (Second) of Judgments section 68.1 (Tent.Draft No. 4, 1977). Id.”
Ideal Mut. Ins. Co. v. Winker, 319 N.W.2d 289 (Iowa 1982). “See generally Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68.1(e)(iii), Comment j (1980). With respect to issues representing the very elements of the crime charged, the adequacy of incentive to contest may be thought manifest in relation to any guilty plea.”
Fischer v. City of Sioux City, 654 N.W.2d 544 (Iowa 2002). “4 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68.1 (Tentative Draft No. 4, 1977)). In other words, it was not reasonably foreseeable that the size of the drainage pipe found to be insufficient for a “once in a lifetime” rain would be an issue only three years later, when a “500…”
United States v. Wilson, 523 F. Supp. 874 (N.D. Iowa 1981). “2d Judgments, § 68.1(d). Admittedly, this is not a proper case for the invocation of the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel.”
Edmundson v. Miley Trailer Co., 252 N.W.2d 415 (Iowa 1977). “Compare § 68.1(a). Whether his involvement in the action is extensive enough to constitute control is a question of fact, to be resolved with reference to these criteria.”
Kruse v. Iowa Dep't of Human Servs., 500 N.W.2d 455 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “2d 121, 124-125 (Iowa 1981) (citing Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68.1(d) (Tent. Draft No. 4, 1977). In State v.”
In re the Marriage of Delmege, 501 N.W.2d 562 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). “4 (Iowa 1981) (citing Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68.1 (TentDraft No. 1977)), advances there may be a need for a new determination of the issue if, among other things, “the party sought to be concluded, as a result of the conduct of his adversary or other special…”
Long Branch Maint. Corportation v. Nicole Adams (Iowa Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “As noted by the district court, in Village Supply our supreme court adopted the exception to the doctrine of issue preclusion found in section 68.1 of the Restatement (Second) of Judgments (Tent.”
Iowa Code § 68.1(a): 1 case
Edmundson v. Miley Trailer Co., 252 N.W.2d 415 (Iowa 1977). “Compare § 68.1(a). Whether his involvement in the action is extensive enough to constitute control is a question of fact, to be resolved with reference to these criteria.”
Iowa Code § 68.1(d): 2 cases
United States v. Wilson, 523 F. Supp. 874 (N.D. Iowa 1981). “2d Judgments, § 68.1(d). Admittedly, this is not a proper case for the invocation of the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel.”
Kruse v. Iowa Dep't of Human Servs., 500 N.W.2d 455 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). “2d 121, 124-125 (Iowa 1981) (citing Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68.1(d) (Tent. Draft No. 4, 1977). In State v.”
Iowa Code § 68.1(e)(iii): 1 case
Ideal Mut. Ins. Co. v. Winker, 319 N.W.2d 289 (Iowa 1982). “See generally Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68.1(e)(iii), Comment j (1980). With respect to issues representing the very elements of the crime charged, the adequacy of incentive to contest may be thought manifest in relation to any guilty plea.”
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.