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 April 3, 2019, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued an opinion concerning an alleged negligent misrepresentation of farmland value. The court found that plaintiffs were not justified in their reliance of either of two appraisal companies’ valuation of farmland and affirmed the district courts grant of summary judgment.
On March 27, 2019, two environmental groups—Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement and Food and Water Watch—filed a petition in state court seeking injunctive and declaratory relief against the State of Iowa, the Department of Natural Resources and others.
On March 20, 2019, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued a ruling on the validity of the assignment of a debtor’s right of redemption. Because the right to redeem a property is transferable, the court allowed the assignee to redeem the debtor’s farm.
Update: On December 2, 2019, The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa issued a preliminary injunction preventing Iowa from enforcing this law.
Update: On April 22, 2019, five advocacy groups filed a lawsuit challenging this new law.
On March 6, 2019, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued a ruling concerning a district court’s judgment ordering a lawyer to return $383,595.63 to his mother’s estate. The court found that because there was a confidential relationship between the son and his mother, and the son did not act in good faith when transferring money from his mother’s account to his account, he had to return the money he took from his mother’s account.
On March 14, 2019, the Iowa Governor signed into law a new agricultural production facility trespass statute. Senate File 519, which was passed by the Iowa House and Senate on March 12, makes it a crime to obtain access to or employment with an agricultural production facility by use of deception with the intent
Update: Governor Reynolds signed SF 220 into law on March 15, 2019. It is effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2018, but before January 1, 2019.
Another March 1, the first day of most Iowa farm leases, arrives soon. This post addresses two common questions we've been receiving this month.
IDOR announced on February 28, 2019 that it too would grant an extension to the March 1 deadline for farmers and fishermen who did not make estimated tax payments by January 15, 2019. These farmers will have until April 30 to file their Iowa returns and pay their income taxes without incurring estima
On February 6, 2019, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued a ruling regarding the right of an out-of-state resident to hunt antlered deer on his property. Because there was a rational basis to distinguish between in-state and out-of-state licensees, the law was constitutional.
Update: SF 220 passed the Senate by a vote of 48-0 on February 18, 2019. They immediately messaged the House. Read the Iowa Legislative Agency Report about this bill here.
On January 9, 2019, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa declared Iowa’s Agricultural Production Facility Fraud statute to be unconstitutional. Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds, No.4:17-cv-00362 (S.D. Iowa 2019).
On December 5, 2018, the Iowa Court of Appeals considered a taxpayer's challenge to the Tax Amnesty Act of 2007. The Court of Appeals found that because plaintiff failed to file a 2002 tax return, amnesty was waived and the Department of Revenue could disallow deductions for the following four years.
On December 5, 2018, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued a ruling regarding a private nuisance dispute between two neighbors. The court held that a ditch running between two neighbors had not changed substantially because of the addition of a culvert.
On December 5, 2018, the Iowa Court of Appeals issued a decision regarding the ownership rights of land located in Clayton County. The court held that the City of Garber was estopped from asserting ownership over the property because it never developed, used, or maintained it; the previous owners had acquired it through adverse possession; and the current owners would suffer unfair damages if they gave up the property.