Titan Tire Corp. v. Employment Appeal Board

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “it [would be] unnecessary to determine whether the ALJ erred or abused its discretion in admitting this evidence because [petitioner] has not shown that any error prejudiced its substantial rights”
• “[I]f the agency’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence, those findings are binding on judicial review.” (alteration in original) (quoting PanDa Eng’g v. Eng’g & Land Surveying Examining Bd., 621 N.W.2d 196, 198 (Iowa 2001))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).