Legal Opinion · Dissent

Callahan v. State

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 19, 1990No. 89-1107Published

1DissentSchultz, Justice

The majority opinion applied the discovery rule to claims brought under Iowa Code section 25A.13 (1987). In this case, the State argued, under the admitted facts, that plaintiff failed to support her position that the discovery rule was applicable. I agree with the State’s position and would not have addressed the discovery rule. Even if I would have addressed the discovery rule, I would not have applied the rule to section 25A.13.

We recently refused to apply the tolling provision of Iowa Code section 614.8 to the claim of a minor under section 25A.13. Harden v. State, 434 N.W.2d 881, 884…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Harden v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 1989
  2. Tomlinson v. SiehlCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1970
  3. Brown v. EllisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
  4. Handeland v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
  5. MacKu by and Through MacKu v. Drackett Prod. Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1984

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API