## Facts

- Vincent Handeland, a minor, rode a borrowed motorcycle in Des Moines, Iowa.
- On September 10, 1971, Vincent collided at an intersection with an automobile driven by Jane Eileen Brown and owned by Dennis Brown, sustaining injuries.
- Vincent, through his father Ronald M. Handeland as parent and next friend, sued the Browns for negligence.
- Ronald also sued in his individual capacity under Iowa R.C.P. rule 8 for medical expenses and loss of services, companionship, and society resulting from Vincent’s injuries.
- The Browns asserted Vincent’s contributory negligence as a defense to both Vincent’s personal-injury claim and Ronald’s Rule 8 claim.
- At trial, the court instructed that if Vincent was contributorily negligent and that negligence proximately caused his injuries, the jury must find for defendants on both claims.
- The jury returned defense verdicts on both claims; only Ronald appealed, challenging the instruction as to his individual Rule 8 claim.

## Issues

1. Whether a parent’s independent claim under Iowa R.C.P. rule 8 for expenses and loss of services, companionship, and society from injury to a minor child is barred by the child’s contributory negligence.

## Decision

- The court held that the child’s contributory negligence does not bar the parent’s separate Rule 8 claim.
- The trial court erred by instructing that Vincent’s contributory negligence was a complete defense to Ronald’s Rule 8 claim.
- The judgment against Ronald on his Rule 8 claim was reversed, and the case was remanded for a new trial on that claim.

## Legal Principles

- A rule 8 parental claim for medical expenses and loss of services, companionship, and society is an independent cause of action protecting the parent’s own legally recognized interests.
- Absent a recognized basis for imputing fault (e.g., agency), a third party’s contributory negligence should not be imputed to bar the claimant’s recovery for invasion of the claimant’s separate interests.
- Restatement (Second) of Torts § 494 was not adopted as controlling on this point; the parent’s recovery is not automatically forfeited because the injured child’s negligence would defeat the child’s claim.

## Conclusion

The court treated the parent’s Rule 8 claim as independent rather than derivative and rejected automatic imputation of a minor child’s contributory negligence to the parent, requiring a new trial on the father’s damages claim without that categorical bar.


Handeland v. Brown, 216 N.W.2d 574 (Iowa 1974)