Legal Opinion
In the Interest of M.T., M.T., and T.B., Minor Children
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided May 19, 2006No. 50 / 05-0179PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TERNUS, Justice.
The district court allowed The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska to intervene in this child-in-need-of-assistance action. The children’s attorney and the Woodbury County Attorney challenge this ruling, claiming the Iowa Indian Child Welfare Act, under which the court authorized the tribe’s intervention, is unconstitutional. We do not reach this issue, however, because we are compelled to conclude the appeal must be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
The county attorney commenced this proceeding under Iowa Code chapter 232, alleging the minor…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Donald E. Powers v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation v. McKie Lighter Co., Inc., Donald E. Powers v. McKie Lighter Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1973
- River Excursions, Inc. v. City of DavenportSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
- Budde v. City Development BoardSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- State v. HendersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In The Interest Of A.w. And S.w., Minor Children, Woodbury County Attorney And A.w. And S.w., Minor Children Vs. IowaSupreme Court of Iowa · 2007
- State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Iowa · 2007
- Tatiana Dixon v. Patti WachtendorfCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2014
- In Re AWSupreme Court of Iowa · 2007
- Andrew Gerth v. Iowa Business Growth, Inc. and Dan RobesonCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2018
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.