## Facts

- The Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) issued Justin Allen Schulte a driver’s license in 1995 on a discretionary basis despite his Stargardt’s disease, a condition causing loss of central vision and reduced visual sharpness.
- Schulte’s ophthalmologist reported the condition to IDOT; IDOT reviewed medical materials and obtained recommendations through an independent medical advisory board process.
- Medical reviewers recommended licensure, and IDOT issued a restricted license requiring corrective lenses and limiting speed to 45 mph.
- On June 28, 1997, Schulte struck bicyclist Charles Leon Kolbe on a Sac County road, causing severe injuries.
- Charles and Karen Kolbe sued the State of Iowa, alleging negligence in issuing Schulte a license and asserting duties arising from Iowa Code § 321.177(7), Iowa Admin. Code r. 761-600.4(2), and common law.
- The district court granted the State summary judgment, ruling there was no duty to the Kolbes and that the tort claim was barred by governmental immunity for discretionary functions; the Kolbes appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Iowa Code § 321.177(7) and Iowa Admin. Code r. 761-600.4(2) create a duty owed to individual members of the public and an implied private cause of action for negligent licensing.
2. Whether, under common law, IDOT owes an actionable duty to specific injured persons in making driver-licensing decisions, or whether the public duty doctrine limits any duty to the public generally absent a special relationship.
3. Whether the claim is barred by the discretionary function exception to governmental tort liability.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the State.
- The court held neither the cited statute nor administrative rule creates a private cause of action or a specific duty owed to individual injured parties.
- The court held IDOT’s driver-licensing obligations are duties owed to the public at large; under the public duty doctrine, no actionable duty ran to the Kolbes absent a special relationship.
- Because the absence of duty defeated negligence, the discretionary function issue did not change the result; the licensing decisions also involved judgment and policy considerations consistent with discretionary function protection.

## Legal Principles

- Negligence liability requires an actionable duty running from the defendant to the plaintiff; regulatory obligations aimed at public safety generally do not, without more, create a duty to individual members of the public.
- A private cause of action will not be implied from a statute or regulation absent indicia of legislative intent to confer a private remedy and to protect a particular class as opposed to the public generally.
- Under the public duty doctrine, breach of a governmental duty owed to the public at large is not actionable by an individual absent a special relationship or other basis for a particularized duty.
- Driver-licensing determinations involving medical fitness and restrictions entail administrative judgment and policy choice; such decisions are commonly treated as discretionary governmental functions.

## Conclusion

The court held the State was not liable for alleged negligent issuance of a driver’s license to a visually impaired driver because the licensing provisions did not create a private remedy or individualized duty, and IDOT’s licensing responsibilities were owed to the public generally under the public duty doctrine; summary judgment for the State was affirmed.


Kolbe v. State, 625 N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 2001)