*1 706 that, liability regulation may
point contrary the statement but maintain such to out 1055, 1059, Ford, infringe safeguards. not constitutional v. 255 from Hessler Iowa 132, quoted 134 with (1963), 125 N.W.2d guest The classification in the statute only 22 majority opinion, approval in the protects operators which owners or of mo- state guest No have statutes. states still vehicles passenger tor from some claims have since has enacted one 1939. Several ordinary negligence based on the driver’s fallen. passengers differently treats such than oth- situated, persons similarly not er does bear guest has the oldest Iowa now nation’s any a fair and substantial relation to rea- also en- Oregon and statute. Connecticut sonably purpose legislative conceivable for Malcolm, in Au- guest statutes 1927. acted statute, inherently the and is irrational. Law, The (1937). 3 at 2 tomobile Guest § guest invidiously The statute is thus dis- in 1937. repealed statute was Connecticut criminatory squared and cannot be with (Supp.1939). 340(E) Conn.Gen.Stat. § equal the constitutional of pro- assurance statute unconstitu- Oregon The was held of the tection laws. 589, Houk, 271 in v. 127 tional Stewart Or. was (1928). Oregon A new P. statute 998 I would reverse the trial court. repealed its in Vermont enacted 1929. 1970, repealed guest in statute and Florida MASON, in 5 Automo-
its statute 1972. Blashfield and RAWLINGS REY- Practice, NOLDSON, Ed. join (Third JJ., bile Law and 211.3 in this dissent. § 1966, Kentucky’s Supp.). statute was 1973 Ludwig unconstitutional in v.
held John- 533, son, Ky. (1932); 49 243 347 S.W.2d statute was Held unconstitu-
California’s Merlo, supra; Kansas’
tional in Brown v. in
guest was held unconstitutional statute Bauder, supra; Dako-
Henry and North v. held in
ta’s was unconstitutional statute Hassett, notes, supra. 23 v. See
Johnson Memphis (1973); 216 4 Drake L.Rev. Larry STRAUSER, Appellant, Dame Notre (1973); State L.Rev. 197 49 Lawyer (1973). 446 v. Johnny Virgil BRYANT, Appellee. California, the recent Kansas I believe No. 56491. decisions, striking
and Dakota all North equal guest protection grounds, statutes on Supreme Court of Iowa. sensitivity to the appropriate demonstrate April 24, 1974. analysis, responsible of constitutional task reasoned, persuasive au- and are are well the striking the statute on
thority for Iowa
same basis. involving any given, not the reasons
For public policy, I would question of
mere statute, guest Code 321.-
hold the Iowa §’ guaran-
494, equal protection the violates Constitution, I, 6,
tees of Article Iowa § 14, Consti- United States
and Amendment dispute the doing so I not In do
tution. regulate vehicle right to motor
legislative
7Q7 *2 States Constitution. Trial court sustained the motion dismiss. to
In Keasling Thompson, sep- v. filed date, arately guest this we held the statute the constitutional on issues same involved here.
Trial sustaining court did not err in the motion to dismiss.
Affirmed.
LeGRAND, UHLENHOPP, REES and JJ., concur.
HARRIS, J., concurs in the result. Special by LeGRAND, concurrence J., joined by in HARRIS, UHLENHOPP and JJ- McCORMICK, J., joined by
Dissent ill by MASON, and REY- RAWLINGS Beardmore, Frye, Alfred A. and Mc- NOLDSON, JJ. Erb, Cartney City, appellant. Charles for & Laird, Burington, Heiny, Ma- Bovard & LeGRAND, special- (concurring Justice City, appellee. son for ly)- adopt special
I in as a concurrence this concurring opinion today the in case filed Thompson, Iowa, Keasling v. 217 N.W.2d MOORE, Chief Justice. 687. Larry petition Plaintiff a Strauser filed
against Johnny Virgil Bryant defendant HARRIS, JJ., and UHLENHOPP alleging damages inju- he sustained from concur herein. ries a passenger received as in a motor ve- operated hicle by owned and defendant McCORMICK, (dissenting). Justice when it overturned due neg- to defendant’s ligent driving. Defendant moved dis- to respectfully I dissent for the reasons ex- petition miss the on the basis of its failure pressed my Keasling in written in dissent v. to state a cause of action under the Iowa Iowa, Thompson, 687, sep- 217 filed N.W.2d guest statute, re- Code 321.494. Plaintiff § arately this date. sisted, guest the is alleging statute uncon- equal protec- stitutional it because denies I, 6,
tion of the under Iowa MASON, RAWLINGS, laws Article and REY- § Constitution, 14, and Amendment NOLDSON, join United JJ., in this dissent.