 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Clark v. Idaho Truss, Docket No. 31378, 2006 Opinion No. 4,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, January 25, 2006, Filed.
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Industrial Commission did not err in apportioning employee's disability between employer and Industrial Special Indemnity Fund under Idaho Code Ann. § 72-332 because employee's permanent partial disability (PPD) ratings for prior injuries were adequately taken into account by using their associated preexisting physical impairment (PPI) ratings.
|
|||||
| Sadiku v. Aatronics Inc., Docket No. 31295, 2006 Opinion No. 5,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, January 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Idaho Industrial Commission's decision denying a claimant's request to set aside a lump sum agreement on the ground that the claimant failed to prove fraud, as required by Idaho Code § 72-718, was not clearly erroneous based on the evidence in the record.
|
|||||
| State v. Casper, Docket No. 31770, 2006 Opinion No. 7,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant served his entire determinate term of three years, which rebutted the presumption of the determinate term being the probable measure of confinement under Idaho Code § 19-2513, it did not, standing alone, provide the appellate court with special circumstances sufficient for a review of the indeterminate term.
|
|||||
| Hughes v. Fisher, Docket No. 30269, 2006 Opinion No. 6,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of prescriptive easement claim was affirmed because the first neighbor used the path along with the general public and performed no independent act that would have put the owner on notice the first neighbor was claiming a prescriptive easement over the owner's land.
|
|||||
| State v. Fisch, Docket No. 31388, 2006 Opinion No. 8,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in granting defendant's Idaho Crim. R. 35 motion to reduce his sentences for lewd contact with minor under 16 because while there was an unusually long lapse between filing of motion and its disposition by court, delay was not caused by court or directly by defendant; most of the delay was caused by Idaho Department of Correction.
|
|||||
| State v. Horejs, Docket No. 30490, 2006 Opinion No. 9,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for aggravated assault, in violation of Idaho Code § 18-905(b), was upheld because even if his lone kick to victim's backside while victim was being bound with duct tape was not likely to produce great bodily harm, actions of his group as a whole were sufficient for a reasonable jury to find a likelihood of great bodily harm.
|
|||||
| State v. Smith, Docket No. 31315, 2006 Opinion No. 70S,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in granting defendant's motion to suppress evidence of marijuana that was found in his apartment where entry into apartment by fire chief and police officer to investigate cause and extent of fire in apartment was no more than an actual continuation of a firefighter's initial entry and, therefore, proper under Idaho Const. art. I, § 17.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
