Court of Appeals Affirms District Court, Affirms Dismissal of Petition for Judicial Review

In Bruss v. Grout Scouts, Inc., No. 19-0943 (Iowa App. April 15, 2020), the court addressed a petition for judicial review that had been filed in a timely fashion but had not been served according to Chapter 17A.  The employee argued that there was an agreement between counsel to accept service of the petition.  Defendants' counsel agreed to accept service, but after several weeks, defendants' counsel indicated she had not received the PJR.  The employee's counsel immediately send the petition but defendants' counsel sought dismissal.  Claimant urged that the employer should be estopped from asserting that the petition had not been properly served.  The Court of Appeals affirmed.

On appeal, the employee argued that she had substantially complied with chapter 17A, which requires service by mail within 10 days.  The employee also argued that the employer should be estopped since defendants' counsel had agreed to accept service.  Because the petition was not provided to opposing counsel until well after the statutory deadline, the court found that substantial compliance with the statute had not been achieved.  The court found this was unlike a situation where a petition was emailed rather than mailed, because in both those situations, service had actually been provided within a timely manner.  

On the estoppel claim, the court finds that defendants counsel did not make a false representation and therefore the elements of estoppel were not met.  Although defendants' counsel agreed to accept service, service still had to be provided within the time limits of the statute.  Defendants' counsel had not impliedly waived that requirement by agreeing to accept service.  The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition.