Iowa Professional Licensing Division Welcome Photo Header

Architects

Accountants

Engineers & Land Surveyors

Landscape Architects

Real Estate Appraisers

Real Estate Sales & Brokers

Professional Licensing Home
About Professional Licensing
Complaint Form
Department of Commerce 

Iowa Law and Rules

Links to Recent Decisions
of Interest - Iowa Supreme Court




(Maintained by the Iowa Judicial Branch)

No. 05-1898 [6-824]                      Filed January 18, 2007 

Full Opinion

Summary

No. 05-1898.   [6-824]    WANFALT v. BURLINGTON BANK AND TRUST 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Louisa County, Mary Ann Brown, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered en banc.   Opinion by Vogel, J.  Special concurrence by Sackett, C.J.    

     Timothy K. Wink and Jay Schweitzer of Schweitzer & Wink, Columbus Junction, for appellants.

    James W. Miller of Cray, Goddard, Miller & Taylor, L.L.P., Burlington, for appellee.

Considered en banc.

Justice CADY
No. 21 / 04-1323                    Filed March 24, 2006 

Full Opinion

Word Document

LARRY STEWART d/b/a LARRY STEWART REALTY, Appellant,
vs.
JEFFREY P. SISSON, Appellee.


      Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, James M. Drew, Judge.

     A real estate broker appeals from a summary judgment dismissing all claims for recovery of a commission from the sale of a business based upon an oral agreement. REVERSED AND REMANDED.

    Judith M. O'Donohoe of Elwood, O'Donohoe, Stochl, Braun & Churbuck, Charles City, attorney for appellant.

Joel J. Yunek of Yunek Isaacson, P.L.C., Mason City, attorney for appellee.
Justice CADY

 

No. 131 / 04-0564         Filed March 10, 2006

Full Opinion

Word Document

FJORDS NORTH, INC., Appellant,
vs.
RANDY HAHN, SUSAN HAHN and H & H HOMEBUILDERS, Appellees.

         Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Larry J. Conmey, Judge.
          Appeal from district court judgment ruling that claim to extend restrictive covenants under Iowa Code section 614.24 was invalid due to claimant’s failure to specify time and manner in which he acquired his interest.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.

     Daniel DenBeste and Robert M. Hogg of Elderkin & Pirnie, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant.

    Michael J. Pitton of Martinek & Pitton, Iowa City, for appellees
Justice CADY

 

No. 5-742 / 04-170         Filed November 23, 2005

Full Opinion

Summary


DALE J. LAUTENBACH and TERESA F. FIELDS-LAUTENBACH, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
vs.
DONALD J. ROWAN and ANNETTE ROWAN, Defendants-Appellees.

    
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Gary G. Kimes, Judge. AFFIRMED.

     Erik A. Luthens of Luthens Law Offices, P.C., West Des Moines, for appellants.

    John H. Terpstra of Brierly Charnetski, L.L.P., Newton, for appellees.
.
Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Miller and Vaitheswaran, JJ. Opinion by Miller, J.

 

No. 73 / 04-0002          Filed September 9, 2005

Full Opinion

Full Opinion Word Document 

BUSINESS CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
d/b/a HAWKEYE BUSINESS BROKERS,
Appellee,
vs.
LEROY WICKS,
Appellant.

     Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge. 
    Seller of business appeals from judgment on behalf of broker for commission on sale of the business.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.

     Michael L. Jankins of Murray, Jankins & Noble, Des Moines, for appellant.

    William B. Serangeli and Jeffry K. Clayton of Smith, Schneider, Stiles & Serangeli, P.C., Des Moines, for appellee.

 

No. 03-1251. [34]           Filed April 29, 2005

Full Opinion

Full Opinion Word Document 

CRAIG J. JENSEN, Appellant, vs. JAMES A. SATTLER and JULIE M. SATTLER, Appellees. 
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Douglas S. Russell, Judge.

Buyer of real estate appeals dismissal of claims against sellers for failure to disclose defects. 
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED
     Stephen J. Holtman, Leonard T. Strand, and Jason M. Steffens of Simmons, Perrine, Albright & Ellwood, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant.         
     Sean W. McPartland of Lynch Dallas, P.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellees.

 

No. 84 /03-470   Filed September 1, 2004

Summary  

Full Opinion 

03-0470   NEXT GENERATION REALTY, INC. v. IOWA REALTY CO.
ppeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Glenn E. Pille, Judge. AFFIRMED.
Defendants, Iowa Realty Company, Inc. and First Realty (Iowa Realty defendants), are members of defendant Des Moines Area Association of Realtors (DMAAR), a professional association of real estate agencies that offers members the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) for listing and selling residential real estate. Plaintiff, Next Generation Realty, Inc., was a DMAAR member until it was expelled for not reporting or paying fees to DMAAR for office exclusive listings. Next Generation protested the fees because it dealt almost entirely with exclusive listings and seldom used the MLS for its clients' listings. In this antitrust suit, plaintiffs' claims are grounded in two Iowa statutes. Under Iowa Code section 553.4 (2003), they claim Iowa Realty defendants conspired to take control of DMAAR through an unorthodox election and conspired to expel plaintiffs from DMAAR and its MLS. They append an assertion to this claim to allege horizontal price-fixing. The claim under Iowa Code section 553.5 is that defendants engaged in a monopolistic practice by refusing to share MLS real estate commissions with them. The trial court dismissed the petition. Plaintiffs appealed. OPINION HOLDS: I. There was no antitrust injury, and without an antitrust injury, the provisions of Iowa Code chapter 553 do not apply. Antitrust laws were not intended to deal with claimed wrongs inflicted on individual parties. Their function is only to foster the public's access to a freely competitive market. The record here contains no hint that the public was inhibited from access to services of real estate brokers. II. The trial court correctly rejected plaintiffs' price-fixing contention because that contention lacked any support in the record. The practice of splitting a 7% commission was established many years ago in the Des Moines business community, and there is no suggestion that the defendants in any way took part in originating the practice or furthering its continuance. The petition was correctly dismissed.

 

03-372. [63], Filed June 16, 2004 

Summary 

Full Opinion

GREGORY O. FRANICH, Appellant, vs. THE REAL ESTATE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF IOWA, Appellee.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, J. Hobart Darbyshire, Judge.Licensed real estate broker appeals district court judgment affirming Commission’s permanent prohibition of broker’s marketing plan.  AFFIRMED.   Opinion by Ternus, J.

Gregory Franich is a licensed real estate broker in the Quad Cities and the owner of Symmetry Mortgage Corporation, a licensed real estate firm. Both are licensed in Illinois and Iowa. As a mortgage broker, Symmetry Mortgage obtains financing from one of three institutions that loan money to its clients and pay a broker's commission to Symmetry Mortgage. It also operates a real estate brokerage business under the trade name of Symmetry Real Estate. The marketing plan at issue in this proceeding involves the relationship between the mortgage financing offered by Symmetry Mortgage and the real estate brokerage services offered by Franich d/b/a Symmetry Real Estate. By forgoing its mortgage broker commission, Symmetry Mortgage offers interest rates below regular market rates to home buyers who use Franich's brokerage services for the transaction. This marketing strategy is advantageous to Franich because his real estate broker's commission is much higher than Symmetry Mortgage's mortgage broker commission. The Iowa Real Estate Commission received a complaint alleging that Franich, while acting as a mortgage broker for Symmetry Mortgage, offered a lower rate to a potential borrower, M.B., if M.B. would change realty companies and hire Symmetry Real Estate. Franich contended he mentioned that this option existed only if the property purchased was in Illinois. Franich conceded, however, that he offered the reduced rate mortgage proposal to potential Iowa clients through his website, which did not limit this opportunity to Illinois property. The Commission found such an offer violated Iowa Administrative Code rule 193E—1.31(6), (7), defining prohibited practices that are deemed unethical or harmful or detrimental to the public within the meaning of Iowa Code section 543B.29(3). The Commission permanently prohibited the tying arrangement proposed by Franich. The Commission's decision was affirmed by the district court on judicial review, and Franich appeals. OPINION HOLDS

 

o. 03-282. [62], Filed June 16, 2004 

Summary 

Full Opinion

RICKY SEDGWICK and JANET SEDGWICK, Appellants, vs. JOEL A. BOWERS, Individually and as Trustee of the J.A. & M.E. BOWERS LIVING TRUST dated June 14, 1999; MARY ELLEN BOWERS, Individually and as Trustee of the J.A. & M.E. BOWERS LIVING TRUST dated June 14, 1999; and ASSOCIATES RELOCATION MANAGEMENT CO., INC., A Colorado Corporation, Appellees.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, James C. Bauch, Judge. Affirmed in Part And Reversed in Part. Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Vaitheswaran, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.
Ricky and Janet Sedgwick had water problems in their Bettendorf home soon after they bought it in November 2000. They investigated and found the prior occupants, defendants, Joel and Mary Ellen Bowers, had also had water problems. However, when the Bowers sold the house, they had falsely represented in their disclosure statements required by Iowa Code section 558A.2(1) (1999) that they had never had water problems. Sedgwicks sued Bowers, as well as Associates Relocation Management Company, Inc., an intermediate buyer. The district court ultimately dismissed the action, and the plaintiffs appealed. OPINION HOLDS

 

No. 2-895 / 02-0166 Filed March 12, 2003

Summary

Full Opinion

Galen Beitz and Eleanor Beitz,Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs.
James P. Bailey and Jeanann R. Bailey, Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, James C. Bauch, Judge. Affirmed in Part And Reversed in Part. Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Vaitheswaran, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.
Two landowners disputed the ownership of a small parcel adjacent to the Maquoketa River. The district court concluded the rightful owner was the legal titleholder, dismissing the defendant's claims of adverse possession and awarding the plaintiffs both attorney fees and a portion of the survey costs. Opinion Holds: The plaintiffs were unable to establish adverse possession of the parcel with clear and positive proof. The attorney fees, however, are not taxable as ordinary costs, and the plaintiffs should not have been required to pay a portion of the survey costs.


No. 00-1254 [40] Filed May 8, 2002

Summary

Full Opinion

Top of Page

AL-KHATTAT v. ENG'G & LAND SURVEYING EXAMINING BD.
General case description: The plaintiff appeals from a district court ruling on judicial review affirming the engineering board's decision denying the plaintiff's application for comity licensure. He contends the district court erred in affirming the board's decision, which he claims was erroneous, unsupported by substantial evidence, unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious, and involved a failure to exercise discretion.


No. 00-119. [209] Filed January 18, 2001

Summary

Full Opinion

Top of Page

MAX 100 L.C. d/b/a RE/MAX 100, an Iowa L.C., NEXT GENERATION REALTY, INC., an Iowa Corporation, and HOMEBUYERS CONSULTANTS, an Iowa Corporation, Appellees, vs. IOWA REALTY COMPANY, INC., an Iowa Corporation d/b/a IOWA REALTY, and FIRST REALTY, LTD., an Iowa Corporation d/b/a FIRST REALTY, Appellants, MIDAMERICAN ENERGY, an Iowa Corporation, Defendant.


No. 99-448. [229] Filed January 18, 2001

Summary

Full Opinion

Top of Page

PANDA ENGINEERING, Appellant, vs. ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING EXAMINING BOARD OF THE STATE OF IOWA, Appellee.


Get Adobe Acrobat Reader

Copyright 2002 The State of Iowa. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement.