Opinion ID: 1277932
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The District Court's Dismissal Order.

Text: Finally, we consider plaintiffs' claim that the district court's judgment was incorrectly cast in the form of a dismissal with prejudice. We agree that this was wrong. Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.946 provides: All dismissals not governed by rule 1.943 or not for want of jurisdiction or improper venue, shall operate as adjudications on the merits unless they specify otherwise. We have held that the converse of this pronouncement is also true, i.e., that dismissals for lack of jurisdiction are not adjudications on the merits. Jorge Constr. Co. v. Weigel Excavating & Grading Co., 343 N.W.2d 439, 444 (Iowa 1984). A dismissal with prejudice is a means of declaring that there has been an adjudication on the merits. Although the merits of plaintiffs' claims against FAF received a good deal of attention in the district court's ruling, and findings were made that would seem to dispose of those claims on the merits, the procedural posture in which the ruling was made only involved a challenge to jurisdiction. The district court's ruling should have reflected that fact and have provided for a dismissal without prejudice. We modify the district court's judgment so as to provide that the dismissal of plaintiffs' claims against FAF is not an adjudication of the merits of their claims. In all other respects, that judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. All justices concur except STREIT, J., who takes no part.