Court Opinion

ID: 9880443
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-27 19:15:23.662848+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:53:58.459425
License: Public Domain

CADY, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
Courts are, at times, capable of deciding legal issues based on public policy. These times, however, occur when the public policy is clear and apparent. See Fitzgerald v. Salsbury Chem., Inc., 613 N.W.2d 275, 283 (Iowa 2000) (“The need for clarity in public policy is ... recognized in our reluctance to search too far beyond our legislative pronouncements and constitution to find public policy to support an action.”). Otherwise, public policy is best left to our legislative branch of government to decide as representatives of the people. The question whether it is imprudent as a matter of law for a parent to waive legal liability on behalf of a child as a condition for the child’s participation in an educational field trip is a matter for the legislature, not judges. If the subject of parental field trip waivers has surfaced in this state as a matter of public concern, the legislature can properly examine the issue and take any appropriate action.
I would affirm the decision of the district court.
TERNUS, C.J., joins this dissent.