District court, Judicial District 5
Heather Lauber
District Court Judge · District 5C · Polk County
About
Judge Lauber, Polk County, was appointed to the Iowa District Court in December 2016. She attended Drake University, where she received her bachelor’s degree in 2000 and her law degree in 2003. Judge Lauber was in private practice from 2003-2011. She was Assistant Public Defender from 2011–2015. Judge Lauber was…
Retention votes
| Election | Yes | No | Kept by |
|---|---|---|---|
| November 5, 2024 | 113,805 | 49,419 | 69.7% yes |
What lawyers said
Before each retention vote, the Iowa State Bar Association asks lawyers who’ve appeared before the judge to rate them from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent), and whether the judge should be kept.3
85.9% of 64 responding lawyers said to keep the judge (2024).
| Question | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Knowledge and use of the law | 4.2 |
| Sees the facts of a case clearly | 4.3 |
| On time for court | 4.1 |
| Listens to arguments and testimony | 4.2 |
| Runs the courtroom well | 4.2 |
| Temperament and manner | 4.3 |
| Clear, well-written decisions | 4.2 |
| Rules promptly | 3.8 |
| Uses technology to improve the courts | 4.3 |
| Avoids needless personal criticism | 4.5 |
| Decides on the law and facts, not outside pressure | 4.3 |
| Courteous and patient | 4.4 |
| Treats people equally | 4.5 |
| Fair to people without a lawyer | 4.5 |
| Said to keep the judge | 85.9% |
| Lawyers responding | 64 |
Source: Iowa State Bar Association Judicial Performance Review: 2024 (page 36).
Appeals from this judge’s cases
2 appeals on record; 2 reversed or vacated at least in part.4
- Criminal appeal No. 23-1390AI summary The defendant appealed a conviction for causing serious injury, arguing that certain video evidence should not have been allowed and that there was not enough proof of his intent. While a lower appeals court had previously overturned the conviction, the Iowa S…
- Silvia R. Cianzio v. Iowa State University, State of Iowa and Board of Regents, State of IowaAI summary An employee sued for gender and wage discrimination and argued that the court should not limit the amount of money they could recover to only a two-year period. The court decided to reverse the previous ruling that had restricted the potential damages. This me…