Iowa Code » Chapter 7 — GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 7.1 (2026)

Office — secretary

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

The governor shall keep the governor’s office at the seat of government, in which shall be transacted the business of the executive department of the state. The governor shall keep a secretary at the office during the governor’s absence. [C73, §55; C97, §60; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §78; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §7.1]

\n
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1966–2024 · leading case: State of Iowa v. Jesse Michael Gaskins, 866 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State of Iowa v. Jesse Michael Gaskins, 866 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2015). · cites it 2× “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 7.1(c), at 698– 99 (5th ed. 2012) (quoting Donald A.”
Potter v. Oster, 426 N.W.2d 148 (Iowa 1988). · cites it 3× “2d 883, 885 (1944); Hillman § 7.1, at 151. Oster has failed to overcome that presumption here.”
Gen. Elec. Capital Corp. v. Com. Servs. Grp., Inc., 485 F. Supp. 2d 1015 (N.D. Iowa 2007). · cites it 3× “The “Event of Default” identified in § 7.1 as a ground for immediate termination of the Collection Agreement is identified as “non-performance” and defined, further, as the following: Failure of the Contractor to perform any term, covenant or condition contained in this…”
Hawkeye Bank & Trust N.A. v. Milburn, 437 N.W.2d 919 (Iowa 1989). · cites it 2× “4 facially, or as applied by the court, violates the due process and equal protection provisions of the United States Constitution. Iowa has no duty to provide a statutory right of redemption.”
Purethane, Inc. v. Iowa State Bd. of Tax Review, 498 N.W.2d 706 (Iowa 1993). “§ 7.1(17A). This evidentiary hearing is “ ‘an oral proceeding whose purpose is to determine disputed facts of particular applicability known as adjudicative facts — the who, what, when, where, and why of particular individuals in specified circumstances.”
State v. Tolsdorf, 574 N.W.2d 290 (Iowa 1998). “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 7.1(b), at 442 (3d ed.1996) (emphasis added) (footnotes omitted).”
Brintnall v. Prof'l Investors of Iowa, Inc., 218 N.W.2d 453 (Iowa 1974). “15 , 17 (1916); McCormick, Law of Evidence, § 195, page 408 (1954); 2 Jones on Evidence, § 7.1, page 84 (6th ed., Gard). No evidence excusing failure to produce the original assignment appears.”
Shcharansky v. Shapiro (Iowa Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 6× “The relevant language of Section 7.1 was a covenant between the Buyers, the individual members of the Shcharansky Group, and the Sellers, the individual members of the Shapiro Group.”
State ex rel. City of Dubuque v. Steger, 147 N.W.2d 45 (Iowa 1966). · cites it 2× “In an action tried to the court without a jury, the defendant was convicted of violating section 7.1 of the City Ordinances of the City of Dubuque, Iowa, which provides: “7.”
State of Iowa v. Patrick Scullark (Iowa Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, § 7.1(c) (6th ed. 2024). Our supreme court discussed Gant at length in Gaskins.”
Susan A. Guge & Peggy McDonald v. Kassel Enter., Inc. (Iowa 2021). “Kuntz, Federal Income Taxation of S Corporations § 7.1 (4th ed. 2013). Craig concedes it’s possible that he could altogether avoid the potential taxes on gains associated with Kassel Enterprises’ assets that he seeks to deduct from the fair-value calculation.”
State of Iowa v. Joellen Marie Eckert (Iowa Ct. App. 2024). “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, § 7.1(c) (6th ed. 2024) (“Certainly the most important characteristic of Gant’s ‘possibility of access’ rule is that it is to be applied ‘at the time of the search’ rather than at some earlier time.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Iowa Code § 7.1(17A) — 1 case
Purethane, Inc. v. Iowa State Bd. of Tax Review, 498 N.W.2d 706 (Iowa 1993). “§ 7.1(17A). This evidentiary hearing is “ ‘an oral proceeding whose purpose is to determine disputed facts of particular applicability known as adjudicative facts — the who, what, when, where, and why of particular individuals in specified circumstances.”
— Iowa Code § 7.1(A) — 1 case
Potter v. Oster, 426 N.W.2d 148 (Iowa 1988). “2d 883, 885 (1944); Hillman § 7.1, at 151. Oster has failed to overcome that presumption here.”
— Iowa Code § 7.1(b) — 1 case
State v. Tolsdorf, 574 N.W.2d 290 (Iowa 1998). “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 7.1(b), at 442 (3d ed.1996) (emphasis added) (footnotes omitted).”
— Iowa Code § 7.1(c) — 4 cases
State of Iowa v. Jesse Michael Gaskins, 866 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2015). “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 7.1(c), at 698– 99 (5th ed. 2012) (quoting Donald A.”
State of Iowa v. Patrick Scullark (Iowa Ct. App. 2024). “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, § 7.1(c) (6th ed. 2024). Our supreme court discussed Gant at length in Gaskins.”
State of Iowa v. Joellen Marie Eckert (Iowa Ct. App. 2024). “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, § 7.1(c) (6th ed. 2024) (“Certainly the most important characteristic of Gant’s ‘possibility of access’ rule is that it is to be applied ‘at the time of the search’ rather than at some earlier time.”
Amended September 14, 2015 State of Iowa v. Jesse Michael Gaskins (Iowa 2015).
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.