Summary
The Iowa Supreme Court held that a district court was required under Iowa Code section 86.42 to enter judgment on a workers’ compensation commissioner’s penalty-benefit award when the statutory requirements were satisfied. The court also affirmed denial of a stay because the appellant failed to provide a record permitting review of the district court’s application of the stay factors under Iowa Code section 17A.19(5).
Holdings
- When a party seeking judgment satisfies all conditions of Iowa Code section 86.42, the district court is required to enter judgment on the workers' compensation commissioner's decision; the possibility that enforcement should be stayed does not prevent entry of judgment.
- Iowa Code section 17A.19(5) applies when a district court considers whether to stay enforcement of a monetary award made by the workers' compensation commissioner.
- The appellate court must affirm the denial of a stay when the appellant fails to provide a record showing the evidence presented at the stay hearing and therefore fails to establish an abuse of discretion.
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court was required to enter judgment under Iowa Code section 86.42 when the statutory conditions for entry of judgment were satisfied.
- Whether Iowa Code section 17A.19(5) governs a district court's decision whether to stay enforcement of a monetary award made by the workers' compensation commissioner.
- Whether the appellate court could review the denial of a stay when the appellant failed to provide a transcript or statement of evidence from the stay hearing.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (4)
- Schadendorf v. Snap-On Tools Corp., 757 N.W.2d 330 (Iowa 2008)(cited)
- Grinnell Coll. v. Osborn, 751 N.W.2d 396 (Iowa 2008)(cited)
- Rethamel v. Havey, 679 N.W.2d 626 (Iowa 2004)(cited)
- In re F.W.S., 698 N.W.2d 134 (Iowa 2005)(cited)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…