Opinion
No. 05-1572
August 9, 2006.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.
Plaintiff appeals from a district court order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants. AFFIRMED.
Leslie G. Peters, Avoca, for appellant.
Andrew J. Bracken and Nathan J. Overberg of Ahlers Cooney, P.C., Des Moines, for appellees.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Mahan and Zimmer, JJ.
Deborah Archibald appeals from a district court summary judgment ruling that dismissed her claims against her former employer. After more than twelve years with SWIPCO, Archibald's employment was terminated in November 2002. Archibald filed a sixteen-count petition in district court in September 2003, alleging discrimination, breach of contract, wrongful discharge, defamation, and other theories regarding the termination of her employment. The action was removed to federal court and later remanded to state court after Archibald voluntarily dismissed an alleged violation of federal employment discrimination law. The district court granted defendants' motion to dismiss several counts and ordered Archibald to recast her petition to conform to the court's ruling. Ten counts remained following the court's ruling on the motion to dismiss.
The Southwest Iowa Planning Council (SWIPCO) is an Iowa Code chapter 28H (2003) council of governments organized to promote regional cooperation and to serve the counties and cities within its region with community and economic development activities that improve the quality of life for southwest Iowa residents. The Southwest Iowa Transit Agency (SWITA) is an internal division of SWIPCO that operates a public transportation system in the region. M.J. Broomfield is SWIPCO's executive director.
The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ten remaining claims. Archibald resisted. The district court granted the motion as to all claims except Archibald's defamation claim. The court subsequently granted defendants' motion to amend and granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment as to Archibald's defamation claims.
Archibald appeals, arguing summary judgment was not appropriate for her contract, wrongful discharge, and defamation claims. Upon our review for correction of errors at law, Iowa R. App. 6.4; Clinkscales v. Nelson Sec., Inc., 697 N.W.2d 836, 840-41 (Iowa 2005), we affirm the district court.
After a careful review of the district court's detailed summary judgment rulings, we conclude the rulings accurately set forth the disputed facts of this case. Moreover, the court's rulings are well-reasoned and its legal conclusions are correct. Thus, we find it unnecessary to repeat the factual circumstances and legal analysis aptly set forth by the district court. In short, Archibald was an at-will employee, and there is no genuine issue of material fact to support her claims that (1) she had a contract of employment, (2) she was terminated in violation of a clear public policy of this state, or (3) she was the subject of false and defamatory communications among other staff at her workplace or that such communications were not otherwise privileged as a matter of law. Because the record, viewed in the light most favorable to Archibald, presents no disputed issue of material fact to any of her claims, defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.981(3); Clinkscales 697 N.W.2d at 841. Accordingly, the district court did not err in granting defendant's motion for summary judgment.