Van Baale v. City of Des Moines, 94-1282

Decision Date19 June 1996
Docket NumberNo. 94-1282,94-1282
Citation550 N.W.2d 153
PartiesThomas Simms VAN BAALE, Appellant, v. CITY OF DES MOINES, William Moulder, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Des Moines, and Kayne Robinson, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Assistant Chief of Police of the City of Des Moines, Appellees.
CourtIowa Supreme Court

Alfredo Parrish and Maggi Moss of Parrish, Kruidenier, Moss, Dunn, Montgomery & Thomas, Des Moines, for appellant.

Terrence A. Hopkins and Hugh J. Cain of Hopkins & Huebner, P.C., Des Moines, and Becky S. Knutson of Davis, Hockenberg, Wine, Brown, Koehn & Shors, P.C., Des Moines, for appellees William Moulder and Kayne Robinson.

Bruce E. Bergman, City Solicitor, Des Moines, for appellee City of Des Moines.

Jon K. Swanson of Austin, Gaudineer, Austin, Salmons, Swanson & Hopkins, Des Moines, amicus curiae, for Iowa Communities Assurance Pool and Iowa League of Cities.

Considered by HARRIS, P.J., and LARSON, CARTER, NEUMAN, and ANDREASEN, JJ.

HARRIS, Justice.

A discharged Des Moines policeman unsuccessfully protested his dismissal through the administrative process and also through judicial review. He then brought this action seeking damages and reinstatement. We agree with the district court's dismissal of the action.

Thomas Van Baale was a seventeen-year veteran of the Des Moines police department. His service record appears to have been exemplary, but his career disintegrated after his former wife filed a domestic abuse complaint against him. See Iowa Code § 236.3 (1993). Van Baale did not meekly submit to arrest, and was also charged with interference with official acts by displaying a dangerous weapon. See Iowa Code § 719.1. After this incident he was provided psychiatric care in a local hospital.

Van Baale pled guilty to the obstruction-of-justice charge. In addition, although steadfastly denying the allegations, he entered a nolo contendere plea on the domestic abuse charge and was found guilty. The court granted him a deferred sentence on both counts. Soon thereafter the department terminated Van Baale's employment.

Van Baale raised two arguments in his administrative challenge before the civil service commission. He first contended his discharge was disproportionately harsh when compared with other disciplinary decisions, especially in view of his exemplary service record. His second argument was based on his claim that Des Moines police chief William Moulder had assured him that, if he pled guilty to the charges against him, he would retain his job, subject to a thirty-day suspension. Van Baale asserted Chief Moulder made this "guarantee" in the interest of avoiding a trial, with the accompanying negative publicity for the police department. Van Baale alleged he relied on the chief's assurance to his detriment by submitting guilty and nolo contendere pleas instead of going to trial as he initially planned. Van Baale claimed that Moulder changed his mind about the suspension and decided to discharge him instead, because he was influenced by adverse media coverage and comments made by local public officials. Van Baale therefore argued Moulder and the city should be estopped from discharging him.

The commission rejected Van Baale's arguments and upheld his firing. On judicial review the district court upheld the civil service commission ruling. On appeal the court of appeals affirmed, and we denied further review.

Prior to that court of appeals decision, Van Baale filed this petition at law against the City of Des Moines, Moulder, and assistant chief Kayne Robinson, alleging breach of oral contract, promissory estoppel, negligence, denial of equal protection, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss. In appealing this ruling, Van Baale first contends the district court erred in holding Iowa Code chapter 400 (civil service) provided his exclusive remedy, and thus preempted his common-law claims. He also asserts the district court erred in dismissing his equal protection claim.

We affirm the district court, vacating a court of appeals decision that held Van Baale's common-law claims were viable. In this law action our review is for correction of errors at law. Iowa R.App.P. 4.

I. Considering Van Baale's first contention we note Iowa Code section 400.18 provides that civil service employees shall not be "removed, demoted, or suspended arbitrarily, except as otherwise provided in this chapter...." In turn, section 400.19 states: "[T]he chief of police ... may peremptorily suspend, demote, or discharge a subordinate ... for neglect of duty, disobedience of orders, misconduct, or failure to properly perform ... duties." Such a decision may be appealed by the aggrieved officer to the civil service commission. Iowa Code § 400.20; see also id. § 400.27 (granting the civil service commission jurisdiction to hear and determine matters under this chapter). Chapter 400 is silent on whether its remedy is or is not exclusive. This silence does not indicate the legislature intended for the chapter's remedy to be nonexclusive; silence on the subject renders the matter ambiguous and requires us to proceed under the rules of statutory construction. Goebel v. City of Cedar Rapids, 267 N.W.2d 388, 392 (Iowa 1978).

Among the most venerable of the canons of statutory construction is the one stating that a statute should be given a sensible, practical, workable, and logical construction. Wollenzien v. Board of Educ., 297 N.W.2d 215, 217 (Iowa 1980). According to another rule, when a statute grants a new right and creates a corresponding liability unknown at common law, and at the same time points to a specific method for enforcement of the new right, this method must be pursued exclusively. Snyder v. Davenport, 323 N.W.2d 225, 227 (Iowa 1982); Lodge v. Drake, 243 Iowa 628, 631, 51 N.W.2d 418, 419-20 (1952) (stating the converse rule that when a statute merely prescribes a new remedy for a preexisting right or liability, such new remedy is deemed cumulative, unless the statute shows an intention to abrogate or supersede the old remedy).

We note and approve the following variation of the rule: "Where the legislature has provided a comprehensive scheme for dealing with a specified kind of dispute, the statutory remedy provided is generally exclusive." 1A C.J.S. Actions § 14 n. 55 (1985); cf. Snyder, 323 N.W.2d at 227 (finding the case squarely within the statutory scheme, and holding that a suit against a liquor licensee for selling liquor to an intoxicated person may be brought only by following the dramshop act); Goebel, 267 N.W.2d at 392 (noting the federal rule that when Congress has established a comprehensive statutory scheme, the scheme is presumed to be the exclusive remedy).

Chapter 400 creates a new right to continued employment (subject only to removal for cause) that did not exist at common law where public employment was at-will. Because chapter 400 creates this new right--not merely a new remedy for a preexisting one--we think chapter 400 proceedings must be considered the exclusive means of challenging the arbitrariness of a civil service employee's discharge.

This view is not altered by Van Baale's attempt to characterize his suit as something other than a wrongful termination claim. It is true he did not label his action as one for wrongful discharge. His claims for breach of oral contract, promissory estoppel, and negligence 1 nevertheless hinge on Moulder's alleged promise that Van Baale would retain his job. The petition also requests, among other things, his reinstatement. To characterize the petition in any manner other than one for wrongful termination would raise form over substance.

II. What we have said does not necessarily resolve Van Baale's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Although...

To continue reading

Request your trial
51 cases
  • Bucco v. W. Iowa Tech Cmty. Coll.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • August 16, 2021
    ..."Outrageous!" Smith v. Iowa State University of Sci. and Tech. , 851 N.W.2d 1, 26 (Iowa 2014) (quoting Van Baale v. City of Des Moines , 550 N.W.2d 153, 156-57 (Iowa 1996) ). "[I]t is for the court to determine in the first instance, as a matter of law, whether the conduct complained of may......
  • Lockhart v. Cedar Rapids Community School Dist.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • April 25, 1997
    ...been that "public employment [is] at will" absent some specific limitation on the termination of an employee. Van Baale v. City of Des Moines, 550 N.W.2d 153, 156 (Iowa 1996). The limitation may be found in a statute, ordinance, contract, or binding handbook. Id. Whereas limitations upon a ......
  • Hanson v. Hancock County Memorial Hosp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • August 15, 1996
    ...Iowa appellate courts do not disclose explanations of the tort different from those stated by this court. See Van Baale v. City of Des Moines, 550 N.W.2d 153, 156 (Iowa 1996); Taggart v. Drake Univ., 549 N.W.2d 796, 802 (Iowa 1996); Dickerson v. Mertz, 547 N.W.2d 208, 214 (Iowa 1996); Lamb ......
  • Hedlund v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 28, 2019
    ...of outrageous conduct. The standard of outrageous conduct "is not easily met, especially in employment cases." Van Baale v. City of Des Moines , 550 N.W.2d 153, 157 (Iowa 1996), abrogated on other grounds by Godfrey v. State , 898 N.W.2d 844, 864, 872 (Iowa 2017). We have said the outrageou......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT