Not surprisingly, the Court of Appeals decision closely tracks and relies heavily upon the decision in Freedom Financial Bank v. Estate of Bosen, No. 09-0397 (Iowa 11/18/2011). See Purchase Money Mortgage Trumps Dower for additional discussion.

The key findings and conclusions which may be summarized from the report are as follows:

• The comprehensive redaction project authorized by the General Assembly has been carried out as proposed and within the authorized budget. Eighty-five percent of the more than 11.5 million
  documents have been processed, and the remainder will be completed by the end of fiscal year 2012.
• Registered users of the Iowa Land Records web site can again access more than 6.2 million documents recorded since 2003.
• More documents will be made accessible following the completion of various quality assurance activities, because commercial redaction services are not perfect. A redaction accuracy rate of 97% is expected. Registered users have been enlisted to help report any private information which may have been missed by the redaction process.
• The county land record information system has been reconfigured to segregate and prevent the disclosure of private information. Additional security measures have been implemented to monitor the activity of registered users who have access to document images.
• Financial resources for the redaction project and funding for the core operation of the county land record information system have been appropriately managed. The ESS Coordinating Committee has provided active oversight for all project resources, and the business of the Electronic Services System has been transparent and open.
• Financial transactions have been subjected to an annual audit since the beginning of the Iowa Land Records E-Submission service (electronic recording). The audit includes all physical assets such as the servers and data storage equipment used to operate the system.
• Project resources are being managed to provide for long-term sustainability for the county land record information system. However, substantial risks exist including concerns about funding for county system maintenance fees.
• The adoption of a permanent $2.00 document fee structure would ensure long-term sustainability, reduce the financial burden on individual county budgets, and permit improved service and lower service fees for electronic recording.
• The State of Iowa and Iowa County Recorders are recognized as national leaders in the adoption of electronic document management systems.
• The Electronic Services System and the county land record information system are committed to the principles of adopting standards, policies and procedures to ensure consistent and high quality services throughout Iowa.
• The enforcement of standards, policies and procedures, including a requirement for participation by all Iowa counties will be an ongoing challenge for a system dependent on the cooperation of many individual County Officials and technical service providers. The General Assembly may wish to reinforce the importance of participating in a statewide system and following established policies and best practices.
• Current policies governing the batch transfer of electronic documents may create unintended outcomes as County Recorders and their customers seek to exchange information in a timely fashion while also conforming to expected privacy standards. The General Assembly may wish to examine these policies.

The General Assembly has explicitly requested an analysis and recommendation regarding the continuance or discontinuance of the fee collected under section 331.604, subsection 3. The recommendation to the General Assembly is as follows.

1. Continue the base level $1.00 electronic transaction fee under section 331.604, subsection 3. This fee is the minimum level of financial support required to sustain the core services of the county land record information system.
2. Consider increasing the electronic transaction fee to $2.00 to ensure the long-term sustainability of the county land record information system and to provide necessary resources for ongoing system enhancements. A comparison of recording fees with neighboring states shows that Iowa recording fees would remain among the lowest – notwithstanding a $1.00 fee adjustment.

The ESS Coordinating Committee and the Iowa County Recorders Association wish to express appreciation to the Iowa General Assembly for the passage of Senate File 465 in 2009, and for the opportunity to carry out the redaction project while restoring an important service to the Iowa real estate industry.

Citing cases from 1945 to 1975, the Court confirmed that this is not a new issue and affirmed existing law:

A much greater “scope of restraint” is allowed between business owners. Baker v. Starkey, 259 Iowa 480, 491, 144 N.W.2d 889, 895 (1966). See also Thomas v. Thomas Truck & Caster Co., 228 N.W.2d 52, 55 (Iowa 1975) (“In the sale-related covenant not to compete cases we do not apply a ‘strict construction’ as appellee asserts, but do hold the contract, being in restraint of trade and personal liberty, should not be construed beyond its fair import.”).

There is greater deference to the scope of the noncompete agreement because (a) the noncompete agreement adds value to the business and (b) the parties typically have greater bargaining power. Although there may be more indulgence for the scope of the covenant, the Court confirmed —

the following three-pronged test in an employee-employer covenant not to compete: “(1) [i]s the restriction reasonably necessary for the protection of the employer’s business; (2) is it unreasonably restrictive to the employee’s rights; and (3) is it prejudicial to the public interest?”

As of January 31, 2012, most private sector employers are required to post a notice advising employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The notice should be posted in a conspicuous place, where other notifications of workplace rights and employer rules and policies are posted. Employers also should publish a link to the notice on an internal or external website if other personnel policies or workplace notices are posted there.

For further information about the posting, including a detailed discussion of which employers are covered by the NLRA, and what to do if a substantial share of the workplace speaks a language other than English, please see our Frequently Asked Questions.

http://www.nlrb.gov/poster. The full-size poster in a PDF is here.

Specifically, we must decide whether a surviving spouse’s dower interest—codified in Iowa Code section 633.211 (2009) as to nonhomestead real property—is subject to either a lender’s purchase-money mortgage or the other debts and charges of the estate of the spouse who died intestate.

In this particular case, the decedent had forged the spouse’s signature. The surviving spouse argued that the decedent could not divest the spouse’s dower interest by fraud. The appellate courts, however, disagreed with the premise of the argument. In affirming the Iowa Court of Appeals, Justice Waterman, writing for the Iowa Supreme Court, agreed with the Court of Appeals and the District Court that neither the decedent nor his surviving spouse ever had an interest in the property greater than the purchase money mortgage. The superiority of the “purchase money mortgage” is enshrined in statute in Iowa Code § 654.12B.

If this reasoning sounds familiar, it should. It is the same reasoning used by the Court of Appeals ruling that the purchase money mortgage trumped the homestead in JP Morgan Chase Bank v. Hawkins, No. 0-959 / 10-1015 (Iowa App. 2/23/2011). See Whither the Homestead? Iowa Code § 654.12B wins again.

The Supreme Court went on to evaluate whether the surviving spouse or the estate should have the surplus funds. The Court had to evaluate sections 633.211 (surviving spouse’s share), 633.218 (selection of property), and 633.350 (charge of debts and expenses against property). In reviewing the history of these sections and the caselaw over more than 120 years, the Court concluded:

Reading the provisions together demonstrates the legislature’s intent that the surviving spouse takes her statutory dower interest in real estate free and clear of the decedent’s debts.

[Judge Robert Hanson] believes the key to keeping the state’s system of fair and impartial courts in place is to get everything out in the open.

“The more we discuss it, the more we defuse the issue,” Hanson said. “The more people realize the fallacy, the folly of all this talk about reining in these judges and things of that nature.”

http://iowaindependent.com/63127/judge-hanson-will-blast-his-way-through-iowas-gay-marriage-controversy ¶¶ 16-17 (viewed 2011/11/01 10:34:10).

The legislation that re-set the exclusion amount at $5,000,000 for 2010 and 2011 and optionally allowed decedents the 2010 modified basis system (Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010 a/k/a TRUIRJCA) also provided that the exclusion amount should be indexed for inflation. The details are in Revenue Procedure 2011-52, which is to be published in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2011-45 on November 7, 2011.

States are all over the map on this front. States, many states, have partisan, contested elections. Other states have systems that look like the federal system. And then there are a bunch of states that are in between, that have achieved this balance between impartiality and accountability. …

The appointing authority, usually the governor, appoints, and then that judge serves a provisional term in office, during which there’s a judicial performance evaluation, a report card, if you will. And that’s about the kinds of things we have been talking about. Is the judge running the courtroom well? Is the judge making decisions in a timely and understandable way? Is the judge well-prepared, knowledgeable on the law?

That information is packaged and available to the voters. And then the voters vote yes, no, up, down on that particular judge as to whether they want that judge to stay in office.

Meanwhile, there is an interesting commentary by Andrew Cohen, who bills himself as chief legal analyst and legal editor for CBS News, a Murrow Award winner, and as one of the nation’s leading legal analysts and commentators in the Atlantic titled “It’s Time to Stop Bullying Judges.” Cohen’s theme is clear: “too few in high positions of government, on any level, seem willing to do what always needs to be done to stop bullies: stand up to them.” And, Cohen does mention Iowa by name:

All over America, GOP-led legislatures are pushing to impeach state judges. Lawmakers in Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, Oklahoma, New Jersey and Pennsylvania have moved in on the judicial branch, the most infamous of these crusades being the effort in Iowa to oust those state supreme court judges who voted in favor of same-sex marriage. Evidently that is still a “high crime or misdemeanor” to some.

Cohen goes on to say: “Some political or legal leader or cultural leader needs to emerge to candidly tell these legislators not just that they are dead wrong in their analysis but that they are doing their constituents a grave disservice by projecting their own failures on the judiciary.”