Lisa Boggess, as administrator of the Estate of Brent Boggess, and as next friend to minors Z.B. and J.B., Drake L. Boggess, individually, and Kim Buttshaw, individually v. City of Waterloo and Kenneth Schaff
── Lisa Boggess, as administrator of the Estate of Brent Boggess, and as next friend to minors Z.B. and J.B., Drake L. Boggess, individually, and Kim Buttshaw, individually v. City of Waterloo and Kenneth Schaff ──
Court: Supreme Court of Iowa
Date: May 01, 2026
Category: General
In the Iowa Supreme Court
No. 25–0559
Submitted March 25, 2026—Filed May 1, 2026
Lisa Boggess, as administrator of the Estate of Brent Boggess and as next
friend to minors Z.B. and J.B.; Drake L. Boggess; and Kim Buttshaw,
Appellants,
vs.
City of Waterloo and Kenneth Schaff,
Appellees.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P.
Odekirk, judge.
The plaintiffs appeal from the district court’s summary judgment applying
the statutory immunity in Iowa Code § 670.4A to dismiss their common law tort
claims arising from a fatal police shooting. Reversed and Case Remanded.
Waterman, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which all justices
joined.
David A. O’Brien of Dave O’Brien Law, Cedar Rapids; Connor N.
Mulholland of Mueller, Schmidt, Mulholland & Cooling, PLLC, Des Moines; and
Neven J. Mulholland of Johnson, Mulholland, Cochrane, Cochrane, Yung &
Engler, P.L.C., Fort Dodge, for appellants.
Bruce L. Gettman, Jr., Adam J. Babinat, and Luke M. Zahari of Redfern,
Mason, Larsen & Moore, P.L.C., Cedar Falls, and Timothy C. Boller of Weilein &
Boller, P.C., Cedar Falls, for appellees.
2
Waterman, Justice.
Waterloo police officer Kenneth Schaaf fatally shot an unarmed driver,
Brent Boggess, moments after Boggess crashed head-on into an occupied squad
car following a prolonged, low-speed chase. This civil action was filed against the
City of Waterloo and Schaaf alleging the police shooting was unjustified. The suit
sought recovery under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. The defendants removed
the case to federal court, which granted their motion for summary judgment
dismissing the § 1983 claims based on Harlow qualified immunity.1 Boggess v.
City of Waterloo, No. C23–2057–LTS–MAR, 2024 WL 3928889, at *11 (N.D. Iowa
Aug. 23, 2024). The federal court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over the state claims, id. at *12, and the litigation resumed in the Iowa District
Court for Black Hawk County. That court in turn relied on issue preclusion to
grant the defendants’ renewed motion for summary judgment under a similar
qualified immunity in Iowa Code § 670.4A (2022).
The plaintiffs appealed, and a few months later, in another case, our court
held that § 670.4A is inapplicable to common law tort claims, Doe v. W. Dubuque
Cmty. Sch. Dist., 20 N.W.3d 798, 806–08 (Iowa 2025). Schaaf and the City argue
that Doe was wrongly decided and urge our court to overrule or distinguish it.
We retained the appeal and now apply Doe and its progeny and our law on issue
preclusion to reverse the district court’s summary judgment ruling.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
The police chase that ended with this fatal shooting began in the early
morning hours of November 16, 2021. Officer Connor Weber was on patrol in
Waterloo. He radioed dispatch to report that a man (later identified as Boggess)
1See Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).
3
attempted to strike him with his truck. Weber activated his emergency lights and
siren and pursued Boggess’s Chevrolet Silverado. Other officers joined the chase.
Boggess took evasive action, including driving into yards and through a
waterway. Eventually, Boggess stopped his truck in an alley where several
officers on foot “tried to speak and reason with Boggess through his open
driver’s-side window.” Boggess, 2024 WL 3928889, at *3. Officer Nick Weber (no
relation to Connor) was in a police cruiser stopped in the alley in front of Boggess.
Schaaf approached on foot and saw Boggess suddenly accelerate forward,
reaching a “top speed of 8 mph before colliding with Weber’s vehicle.” Id. “Sch
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}