Iowa Appeal Deadline Leaves No Room for Error
Strawn v. Strawn, No. 13-1433, 2014 Iowa App. LEXIS 903 (Iowa Ct. App. Sept. 17, 2014)
Overview
A recent case from the Iowa Court of Appeals highlights the intricate interplay among procedural rules and should remind attorneys and parties that time deadlines for filing appeals allow no room for error. Finding that the rules were not properly followed in the case at hand, the Iowa Court of Appeals recently dismissed an appeal from a partial summary judgment as untimely.
Facts
On August 6, 2013, the district court entered partial summary judgment for the defendant in a family dispute involving the interpretation of a widow’s revocable trust. Several issues remained for trial. On August 7, 2013, the plaintiffs filed a “motion to amend and enlarge,” claiming that the district court’s order of partial summary judgment was erroneous. On August 19, 2013, the district court entered an order denying the motion to reconsider. On September 11, 2013, the plaintiffs filed an application for interlocutory appeal with the Iowa Supreme Court and on September 17, 2013 filed a “Notice that an Appeal was Filed” in the district court. The defendant resisted the application for appeal on the ground that the August 7 “motion to amend and enlarge” was not a proper motion pursuant to Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.904(2). Thus, the defendant argued that it did not operate to extend the otherwise 30-day period during which a notice of appeal must be filed under Iowa. R. App. P. 6.101(1)(b).
Because the plaintiffs’ notice of appeal was filed on September 11 (more than 30 days after the district court entered the partial summary judgment), the court stated that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal only if the August 7 “motion to amend and enlarge” tolled the time for filing an appeal. Iowa R. 1.981(3) provides that if summary judgment is rendered on the entire case, Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.904(2) applies. Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.904(2) allows parties to file a motion to enlarge or amend a judgment. If a proper Rule 1.904(2) motion is filed, the time for filing a notice of appeal is tolled until 30 days after the court rules on the motion.
Looking to the plain language of the applicable rules, the court held that the plaintiffs’ post-trial motion was not a proper Rule 1.904(2) motion because it did not meet the requirements of Rule 1.981(3). Rule 1.904(2) could not apply under Rule 1.981(3) because summary judgment was not rendered on the entire case. Because only a timely and proper Rule 1.904(2) motion could toll the time for filing an appeal, the time for filing an appeal was not extended by the plaintiffs’ purported “motion to amend and enlarge.” Because the plaintiffs thus failed to file a timely notice of appeal, the court found that it was without subject matter jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
Conclusion
The first lesson from Strawn is that procedural rules can be tricky. Make sure you understand the interplay among them. The second lesson from Strawn is “better safe than sorry.” Dismissed appeals strip parties of their rights and waste court resources. When in doubt, file early.
Copyright 2014 Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without express written permission.
Tags: Iowa estate planning