Iowa Resources


We have written detailed reviews of Iowa law impacting agricultural producers and landowners. Access these reviews by clicking on the tiles below. You can also review Iowa cases on a particular subject by searching our list of Iowa case law reviews at the bottom of this page.

Search Iowa Resources

On December 16, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion on the timeliness of a redemption of agricultural real estate sold at a sheriff’s sale. Because the assignee did not pay the full amount due within the redemption period, the redemption attempt was untimely.

On November 4, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion determining whether an assessor properly appraised a feed manufacturing facility’s machinery for property tax purposes. The court analyzed whether a feed mill and steel grain storage bins met the definition of machinery under Iowa Code chapters 427A and 427B. Machinery must be used directly in manufacturing and a necessary part of the manufacturing process, used solely for effectuating that purpose, to qualify as tax exempt machinery.

November 30, 2020 | Kitt Tovar Jensen

On November 30, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion regarding a district court’s order modifying farm leases. The court reversed the lower court’s order because the leases were not subject to judicial revision, nor was there evidence that court reformation was necessary.

Background

A farmer owned 18,000 acres of farmland. He leased approximately half of the land to family members, including his daughter, at discounted rates. Family members did not know what rate the farmer charged other family members. The farmer did not use written leases.

On November 30, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion regarding a trustee’s actions before she was replaced by judicial order. The court affirmed that the trustee’s inheritance should be reduced for tax penalties and interest incurred because she engaged in self-dealing. The court also affirmed a $20,000 trustee fee award and the denial of sanctions.

On November 4, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed a district court order granting a permanent injunction preventing the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs' use of an easement and private roadway. The court found that the defendant had improperly obstructed the easement with gates, fencing, and speed bumps, and that Iowa's partition fence law was inapplicable to the case.

On November 4, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals determined that beneficiaries of a trust had not shown that a trust advisor should be removed from her role. The court found that any potential conflict of interest was waived when the settlor created the trust and that the advisor had not committed fraud, dishonesty, or abuse of discretion so as to require removal.

On November 4, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s judgment in a property dispute between a dairy farmer and his new neighbors. The court ruled that the dairy farmer failed to show that both landowners accepted a fence as the boundary line. The court also affirmed that a 1955 easement did not grant the neighbors the right to cross the dairy farmer’s land.

On November 4, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued a ruling in a seven-sibling dispute over the inheritance of 240 acres of farmland. The court affirmed a jury verdict setting aside a mother’s will due to lack of mental capacity and undue influence, but reversed the portion of the verdict finding intentional interference with an inheritance. The court remanded for a new trial.

On November 4, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion regarding the distribution of farm property in a will. The will created a sale restriction on the farmland and listed several requests regarding future treatment of the testator’s farm tenant. The court affirmed that the sale restriction created an unenforceable restraint on alienability. Additionally, the court ruled that the decedent’s requests for the beneficiary to lease the farmland to the current tenant and provide favorable  terms to that tenant were optional, not mandatory.

October 27, 2020 | Kristine A. Tidgren

As October comes to an end, it may be helpful to review the Iowa Department of Revenue’s tax filing deadlines during this crazy year. A recent news release from IDOR details this information.

October 27, 2020 | Kristine A. Tidgren

It has certainly been a year of challenges. COVID-19 triggered widespread economic harm, a once-in-a-lifetime derecho flattened fields and pummeled grain bins, and drought compounded the damage. Because of these disasters, most farmers received some unexpected payments in 2020.

On October 7, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion on whether a document signed by the trust grantor the day before he passed away was an amendment to his estate plan or merely instructions to his attorneys to redraft the plan. Because the document was “vague, obscure, and ambiguous,” the court affirmed that it was not an amendment to the trust.

On October 27, 2020, the EPA announced that it had approved the applications of Bayer and BASF for new registrations of dicamba-based XtendiMax and Engenia for over-the-top use on dicamba-tolerant cotton and soybeans. It also approved Syngenta’s application for a label amendment to extend the December 20, 2020, expiration date for dicamba-based Tavium.

On October 7, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals reversed a district court order which had denied a farming cooperative summary judgment on a claim of negligent hiring. The claim arose in a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the estate and family members of a farmer killed when an employee of a trucking company drove into the back of the farmer’s tractor with a grain truck The court ruled that the cooperative could not be liable for the negligent hiring of its independent contractor’s employee.

October 15, 2020 | Kitt Tovar

On October 7, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion concerning a city’s intent to develop land for a park and new high school. A landowner claimed the city committed an unconstitutional taking when it “earmarked” approximately nine acres of land for a potential right-of-way. Because the plans to acquire the land were theoretical, the court affirmed that the city did not create a servitude or uneconomical remnant.

Pages