Unless the change is under rule 1.801(5), the court granting it shall order the trial held in a convenient county in the judicial district, or if the ground applies to all such counties, then in another judicial district. If the ground applies only to a judge, the court in its discretion may refuse a change and procure another judge to try the case where it was brought, or the supreme court may designate another judge.
Rule 1.805.Where tried
Division VIII: Change of Venue · Last amended February 15, 2002 · Last verified July 15, 2026
In one sentenceRule 1.805 directs that, apart from a fraud-based transfer under Rule 1.801(5), a granted change of venue sends the case to a convenient county in the same judicial district — or another district if the ground applies district-wide — and lets the court instead obtain a different judge when the problem is with the judge alone.
Full Text of Rule 1.805
Plain-English Summary
Granting a change of venue is only half the question; Rule 1.805 answers the other half — where the case goes. Outside the fraud-based transfer under Rule 1.801(5), which sends a case to the defendant's county of residence, the court granting a change orders trial held in a convenient county within the same judicial district.
If the ground for the change applies to every county in that district — widespread prejudice, for instance, rather than something local to one county — the case moves to another judicial district entirely. The rule scales the remedy to the scope of the problem.
Rule 1.805 also offers an alternative when the underlying problem is the judge alone, not the venue itself. In its discretion, the court can refuse the change and instead arrange for a different judge to try the case where it was originally brought, or the supreme court can designate that different judge. That keeps the case in its original county when moving the trial is not necessary — only the judge needs to change.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does a case go once a change of venue is granted?
Rule 1.805 sends it to a convenient county within the same judicial district, unless the ground for the change applies to the whole district, in which case it goes to another judicial district. The fraud-based transfer under Rule 1.801(5) is handled separately and goes to the defendant's county of residence.
If the only problem is the judge, does the case still have to move to a new county?
Not necessarily. Rule 1.805 lets the court, in its discretion, refuse the change and instead procure another judge to try the case where it was originally brought, or the supreme court can designate that judge.
What happens if venue prejudice affects an entire judicial district?
Rule 1.805 provides that when the ground for the change applies to all counties in the district, the case is transferred to another judicial district rather than just another county within the same one.
Does Rule 1.805 apply to the fraud-in-contract venue change under Rule 1.801(5)?
No. Rule 1.805 carves out changes under Rule 1.801(5), which follow their own rule sending the case to the defendant's county of residence instead.
Who decides which county the case is transferred to?
The court granting the change designates a convenient county in the judicial district (or another district, if needed), exercising its own discretion within the bounds Rule 1.805 sets.
Source & verification. Rule text and the Comment are
reproduced verbatim from the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the
Iowa Supreme Court. Last verified July 15, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: iowa venue change destination countywhich county case transferred iowarule 1.805 iowachange of judge instead of venue iowa