 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Braunschweig v. Holmes11/9/2005
T.J. Braunschweig appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants. AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Vogel and Eisenhauer, JJ.
T.J. Braunschweig appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Todd Holmes, David Skilling, and the Kossuth County Board of Supervisors (Board) (the parties are collectively referred to as "defendants"). Braunschweig applied for the position of Kossuth County Attorney after Skilling announced his resignation. Braunschweig was an assistant county attorney in Kossuth County at the time. The Board ultimately appointed Holmes to the position; however, we ruled today in Braunschweig v. Board of Supervisors, No. 04-1506 (Iowa Ct. App. filed November 9, 2005) that the appointment of Holmes was legally ineffective due to the Board's failure to provide proper public notice of its intent to fill the vacancy by appointment. Through some manner of events Braunschweig's employment was terminated after Holmes took over the county attorney's position. Braunschweig filed an action, that we now take up on appeal, alleging (1) wrongful discharge; (2) violation of his civil rights, and (3) intentional interference with a business relationship. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. Braunschweig appeals. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.
I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
The background facts for this case have been summarized in Braunschweig v. Board of Supervisors, No. 04-1506 (Iowa Ct. App. filed November 9, 2005) and will not be repeated here.
Braunschweig filed the action leading to this appeal in the district court on August 11, 2003 alleging: (1) wrongful termination because he was terminated by a person without legal authority to do so, the defendants violated the procedures found in Iowa Code section 331.903(2) (2001), the defendants violated Iowa's veteran's preference law found at Iowa Code section 35C.6, and he was discharged due to the exercise of his right to freedom of speech; (2) violation of his civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983 (2001); and (3) intentional interference with a business relationship between Braunschweig and Kossuth County. The district court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and Braunschweig appeals.
II. SCOPE OF REVIEW
We review summary judgment rulings for correction of errors of law. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; Mason v. Vision Iowa Bd., 700 N.W.2d 349, 353 (Iowa 2005). Where the record shows no genuine dispute of a material fact, summary judgment is appropriate. Id. In determining whether summary judgment is appropriate, we view the entire record in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Id. We also indulge in every legitimate inference that the evidence will bear in an effort to ascertain the existence of a fact question. Id.
III. ANALYSIS
Issue Preclusion
The district court relied on its ruling granting summary judgment in favor of the Board in a previous case in applying the doctrine of issue preclusion. The district court applied issue preclusion in finding (1) the Board substantially complied with the notice requirements in appointing a new county attorney, (2) Holmes properly established residency in Kossuth County prior to his appointment, (3) Skilling properly postponed his resignation date, and (4) the Board complied with Iowa's veteran's preference law in hiring Holmes.
Issue preclusion may be invoked where: (1) the issue in the present case is identical, (2) the issue was raised and litigated in a prior action, (3) the issue was material and r
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Iowa Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|