Nonviability of Godfrey Constitutional Tort Claims

Introduction

This commentary examines the Iowa Supreme Court’s per curiam decision in Wagner v. State of Iowa and William L. Spece, No. 22-1625, filed April 4, 2025. The case arose from a wrongful‐death suit brought by Krystal Wagner, individually and as administrator of the estate of her son, Shane Jensen, who was shot and killed by an Iowa Department of Natural Resources officer, William Spece, during a police standoff. The key legal issue was the viability of so-called “Godfrey claims”—tort actions under the Iowa Constitution recognized in Godfrey v. State (2017)—and whether those claims survived subsequent overruling in Burnett v. Smith (2023). Other issues included waiver of common‐law claims under the Iowa Tort Claims Act and relevant sovereign‐immunity defenses.

Summary of the Judgment

The Supreme Court of Iowa affirmed the summary judgment entered by the district court and the Iowa Court of Appeals. It held that:

Godfrey claims are no longer viable under Iowa law, in light of the court’s overruling of Godfrey v. State in Burnett v. Smith.
The plaintiff had no vested due process right to maintain Godfrey claims once that precedent was invalidated.
The plaintiff had waived her common‐law wrongful‐death and related claims by conceding them in district court and, in any event, they would fail on sovereign-immunity grounds under the Iowa Tort Claims Act.

Accordingly, the Court affirmed dismissal of all counts and entered judgment in favor of the State of Iowa and Spece.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

Godfrey v. State (898 N.W.2d 844, 2017) – Recognized constitutional‐tort claims under article I of the Iowa Constitution. Four justices formed the plurality, with a concurring‐in‐part/dissent by Chief Justice Cady.
Burnett v. Smith (990 N.W.2d 289, 2023) – Overruled Godfrey, holding that Iowa’s constitution does not support independent tort claims outside the common law and statutory framework.
Iowa Tort Claims Act (Iowa Code ch. 669) – Governs claims against the State and its employees; provides procedural requirements, caps on damages, administrative exhaustion, and venue provisions.
Wagner v. Iowa (2019 WL 13551548 and 2021 WL 521309) – The federal district court case certifying questions to the Iowa Supreme Court regarding the applicability of chapter 669 to Godfrey claims and subsequently dismissing Godfrey counts for lack of jurisdiction.
Thorington v. Scott County (No. 22-1194, 2024) – Addressed application of Burnett on interlocutory appeal and remanded for district court consideration of the overruling.
Valdivia v. Porsch (718 F. Supp. 3d 919, S.D. Iowa) – Federal authority confirming no vested property interest in a common-law rule that is later overruled.

Legal Reasoning

The Iowa Supreme Court’s reasoning unfolded in three main steps:

Nonviability of Godfrey Claims: Relying on Burnett v. Smith, the Court reiterated that constitutionaltort claims under the Iowa Constitution (often called Godfrey claims) are incompatible with the state’s constitutional text, judicial tradition, and legislative scheme. Having overruled Godfrey, the Court has consistently held that no such claims survive.
No Vested Rights in Overruled Precedent: The Court rejected any due process or equitable reliance argument that the plaintiff had a vested right to pursue Godfrey claims after the Iowa Supreme Court’s certified-question answers in Wagner’s federal case. Federal and state precedent establish that litigants have no property or vested interest in a judicially created cause of action once it is invalidated.
Waiver and Sovereign Immunity for Common‐Law Claims: The plaintiff conceded in district court that her common‐law wrongful‐death, negligent hiring/training, and loss‐of‐consortium claims should be dismissed. The Court found no error in granting summary judgment on those counts. Even absent waiver, the Iowa Tort Claims Act’s sovereign‐immunity provisions and procedural requirements would bar or limit those claims against the State and its employees.

Impact

This decision cements the following points in Iowa tort jurisprudence:

Godfrey claims—constitutional torts under the Iowa Constitution—are definitively no longer available to plaintiffs.
Future litigants must look to statutory remedies (e.g., the Iowa Tort Claims Act) or common‐law actions supplemented by section 1983 federal claims, rather than state constitutional torts.
The importance of tracking changes in Iowa Supreme Court precedent: litigants cannot rely on a judicially created cause of action once overruled, even if they filed claims while the old precedent was in effect.
Certification of state‐law questions by federal courts remains a powerful but not infallible tool; state constitutional law can still evolve in ways that alter the availability of causes of action.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Godfrey Claims: Judicially created tort actions under the Iowa Constitution recognizing civil remedies for constitutional violations, first recognized in 2017 and overruled in 2023.
Iowa Tort Claims Act (ITCA): A statute that waives sovereign immunity in limited circumstances, imposes procedural prerequisites (notice, administrative exhaustion), and caps damages for claims against the State and its employees.
Sovereign Immunity: The principle that the State cannot be sued without its consent, subject to legislative waivers like the ITCA.
Certified Questions: A procedure by which a federal court asks the state’s highest court to clarify unsettled questions of state law.
Summary Judgment: A procedural device allowing a court to decide a case without a full trial when there are no genuine disputes of material fact and a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Conclusion

The Iowa Supreme Court’s decision in Wagner v. State of Iowa and William L. Spece reaffirmed the inviability of Godfrey constitutional tort claims and enforced procedural and immunity protections for common‐law actions under the Iowa Tort Claims Act. Plaintiffs may no longer rely on judicially created state constitutional torts and must pursue remedies through established statutory frameworks or federal section 1983 actions. This ruling underscores the finality of Burnett v. Smith and reaffirms the boundaries of constitutional and common‐law tort litigation in Iowa.

Nonviability of Godfrey Constitutional Tort Claims: Supreme Court of Iowa Decision