Court Opinion

ID: 9858192
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:18:11.582216+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:53:28.377841
License: Public Domain

*599SCHULTZ, Justice
(concurring).
I agree with the majority opinion with one exception. I think the moot question should be addressed because of its important public policy implications.
I would hold that memorandums written by chief hearing officers should not be classified as “rules” under the definition of Iowa Code section 17A.2(7). Such memorandums are merely legal opinions rendered in a situation where uniformity is desirable, but there is not time to enact rules. The opinions are not binding on anyone. I would give little heed to the stringent and legalistic interpretation of the statute requested by the appellants. The suggested result would hamstring agency lawyers in emergency situations from giving legal opinions designed to alleviate diverse results and afford some uniformity in agency actions. I do not believe the legislators intended such opinions to be classified as rules. Accordingly, I would affirm on this basis.