You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Frideres v. Schiltz

Citations: 540 N.W.2d 261; 1995 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 242; 1995 WL 699839Docket: 85/94-400

Court: Supreme Court of Iowa; November 22, 1995; Iowa; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves a lawsuit filed by an individual and her family against her parents and siblings, alleging assault, battery, sexual abuse, and intentional infliction of emotional distress due to childhood abuse. The defendants sought summary judgment, leading to the certification of questions to the Iowa Supreme Court concerning the retroactive application of Iowa Code section 614.8A, which extends the period to file claims for sexual abuse. The court evaluated whether the statute could revive claims previously barred by the statute of limitations, ultimately concluding that section 614.8A does not apply retroactively to revive such claims, as legislative intent for retroactivity was not evident. The court also addressed the application of the discovery rule, which permits claims to be filed within two years of the injury's discovery, and examined the scope of claims included under section 614.8A. Additionally, the court considered the constitutional challenge regarding the statute's alleged vagueness and affirmed that the language was sufficiently clear. The principles of parental immunity and their limitations in cases of known sexual abuse were also analyzed. Ultimately, the certified questions were resolved based on these legal principles, reinforcing the court's consistent approach to statutory interpretation and application in cases involving potential retroactive effects.

Legal Issues Addressed

Discovery Rule in Sexual Abuse Claims

Application: The court applies the discovery rule to sexual abuse claims, allowing a plaintiff to bring a claim if they were unaware of their injury or its cause until within two years of filing the lawsuit.

Reasoning: The Iowa Supreme Court applies the discovery rule, which allows a plaintiff to bring a claim if they were unaware of their injury or its cause until recently, as seen in the cases of *Wilber v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.* and *Doe v. Cherwitz*.

Parental Immunity in Negligence Claims

Application: The principle of parental immunity is discussed in the context of negligence claims related to child-rearing, but does not protect parents from liability if they were aware of and permitted sexual abuse against their children.

Reasoning: The principle of parental immunity protects parents from liability for negligent acts related to their authority and discretion in child-rearing. However, this immunity does not extend to negligence claims when parents are aware of and permit sexual abuse against their children.

Retroactivity of Statutes

Application: The court discusses the retroactive application of Iowa Code section 614.8A, which allows claims for sexual abuse to be filed up to four years after discovery, but concludes it does not apply retroactively to revive claims barred under prior statutes.

Reasoning: Specifically, it was concluded that Iowa Code section 614.8A, which allows claims for sexual abuse to be filed up to four years after discovery, does not apply retroactively to revive claims barred under prior statutes of limitations.

Vagueness of Statutory Language

Application: The court addresses the constitutional challenge regarding the vagueness of Iowa Code section 614.8A but finds the statute sufficiently clear in its scope and prohibitions.

Reasoning: The defendants' argument that section 614.8A is unconstitutionally vague is dismissed; the statute adequately conveys its scope and prohibits non-related claims.