D.S., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. M.B., Respondent–Appellee. (2026)

Court of Appeals of Iowa.

D.S., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. M.B., Respondent–Appellee.

No. 25-1598

Decided: July 22, 2026

Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Badding, J., and Bower, S.J.

D.S., Lumberton, Texas, self-represented appellant. Austin Norden of Viner Law Firm, Cedar Rapids, attorney for appellee.

A father challenges the district court's dismissal of his Iowa Code chapter 600B (2022) petition to establish custody and visitation of two children, raising a myriad of claims in his appellant's brief and reply brief.

The district court determined that because the father's parental rights to the children were terminated in 2024, he lacks standing to state a claim in support of custody and visitation. See Donovan v. Thompson, No. 22-1686, 2023 WL 6292287, at *2–3 (Iowa Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2023) (holding the district court correctly dismissed a father's chapter 600B petition due to lack of standing because he was unable to establish paternity to the child). Finding no error, see LS Power Midcontinent, LLC v. State, 988 N.W.2d 316, 329 (Iowa 2023) (reviewing the district court's decision to dismiss a case due to lack of standing for errors at law), we affirm without further opinion, see Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d), (e).

AFFIRMED.

Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network