An Infamous Case: How the Iowa Supreme Court’s Minimalist Approach Forced Everyone to Come Back for More in Chiodo v. Section 43.24 Panel, 846 N.W.2d 845 (Iowa 2014)

Authors

Michael S. Boal, University of Nebraska College of Law

Abstract

I. Introduction

II. Background ... A. Chiodo v. Section 43.24 Panel Facts ... B. Chiodo v. Section 43.24 Panel Opinions ... C. Judicial Minimalism

III. Analysis ... A. Dual Disorder: Two Levels of Minimalism ... B. More Harm than Good: Four Indicators ... 1. Final Arbiter of Constitutional Rights ... 2. Application of Stare Decisis ... 3. Repeat Players and Institutional Relationships ... 4. Increased Future Litigation

IV. Conclusion

Recommended Citation

Michael S. Boal, An Infamous Case: How the Iowa Supreme Court’s Minimalist Approach Forced Everyone to Come Back for More in Chiodo v. Section 43.24 Panel, 846 N.W.2d 845 (Iowa 2014), 94 Neb. L. Rev. 737 (2015)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol94/iss3/6