Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 97B.29 (2026)

Judicial review

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IA-LEGlegis.iowa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Judicial review of action of the system may be sought in accordance with the terms of the Iowa administrative procedure Act, chapter 17A. Notwithstanding the terms of the Iowa administrative procedure Act, chapter 17A, petitions for judicial review may be filed in the district court of the county in which the claimant was last employed or resides, provided that if the claimant does not reside in the state of Iowa the action shall be brought in the district court of Polk county, Iowa, against the system for the review of this decision, in which action any other parties to the proceeding before the system shall be named in the petition. The system may also, in its discretion, certify to such courts, questions of law involving any decision by it. Such petitions for judicial review and the questions so certified shall be given precedence over all other civil cases except cases arising under the workers’ compensation law and the employment security law of this state. [C46, 50, §97.33; C54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §97B.29] 2001 Acts, ch 68, §21, 24; 2003 Acts, ch 44, §114; 2003 Acts, ch 145, §286 Referred to in §97B.19\n\n 97B.30 and 97B.31 Reserved.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2006–2006 · leading case: Thoms v. Iowa Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys., 715 N.W.2d 7 (Iowa 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Thoms v. Iowa Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys., 715 N.W.2d 7 (Iowa 2006). “Iowa Code § 97B.29. Under the Act, we may only interfere with the agency decision if it is erroneous under a ground enumerated in the statute, and a party’s substantial rights have been prejudiced.”

Allan T. Thoms Vs. Iowa Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. & Emp. Appeal Bd. (Iowa 2006). “Iowa Code § 97B.29. Under the Act, we may only interfere with the agency decision if it is erroneous under a ground enumerated in the statute, and a party’s substantial rights have been prejudiced.”

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.