DANNY G. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. BUDGET LIGHTING, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 9-352 / 08-1963
Filed May 29, 2009
DANNY G. DAVIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
vs.
BUDGET LIGHTING, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Mary Ann
Brown, Judge.
Danny Davis appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in
Budget Lighting, Inc.’s favor on Davis’s claim for wages. AFFIRMED.
Steven E. Ort of Bell, Ort & Liechty, New London, for appellant.
Gerald D. Goddard of Cray, Goddard, Miller, Taylor & Chelf L.L.P.,
Burlington, for appellee.
Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Eisenhauer and Mansfield, JJ.
2
MAHAN, P.J.
Danny Davis appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in
Budget Lighting Inc.’s favor on Davis’s claim for wages.
The district court
determined the parties’ contractual agreement to reduce time for contesting
commission payments was reasonable and not contrary to public policy. Davis
argues the employment contract provision limiting his right of action to a period of
one year is void as contrary to public policy and is unreasonable, and he met the
one-year limitation to commence an unpaid wage claim in the contract by asking
the commission of labor to commence an administrative action pursuant to Iowa
Code chapter 91A. According to well-settled law, parties to a valid contract may
agree to modify the statutory limitation period if the modification is reasonable.
See, e.g., Douglass v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 508 N.W.2d 665, 667 (Iowa
1993).1 After a thorough review and consideration of the record, we conclude the
district court’s ruling is correct and we therefore affirm.
AFFIRMED.
1
We note that Article 12.01 of the employment contract provides that Minnesota law
governed. However, neither party pled or attempted to prove the applicability or force of
Minnesota law. Under these circumstances, we must apply Iowa law to resolve the
dispute before us. Pennsylvania Life Ins. Co. v. Simoni, 641 N.W.2d 807, 811 (Iowa
2002).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
