 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Beach Lateral Water Users Ass'n v. Harrison, Docket No. 31339, 2006 Opinion No. 22,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Beach Lateral Association had standing under Idaho Code §§ 42-1301 and 1303 to seek injunctive relief to confirm existence of ditch easement implied by prior use held by members, but it could not quiet title to ditch easement in its favor. Easement was implied from prior use over landowner's ditch, and it extended to connection with borrow pit.
|
|||||
| First State Bank of Eldorado v. Rowe, Docket No. 30099, 2006 Opinion No. 21,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Owners could not claim ownership or possession of crops without right to ownership or possession of land as right of redemption to assignee included rights to title, ownership and possession of property. Under Idaho Code § 11-403, owners, upon restoration to estate, were not entitled to growing crops. Amount of attorney's fees to bank was reduced.
|
|||||
| State v. Averett, Docket No. 30261, 2006 Opinion No. 16,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, March 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court properly admitted defendant's coconspirator's cellmate's statements, under Idaho R. Evid. 804, because the statements were genuinely self-incriminatory, admitting to the coconspirator's involvement with the manufacture of methamphetamine, and evidencing her desire to enlist the cellmate's help to secrete evidence from the police.
|
|||||
| State v. Jenkins, Docket No. 31683, 2006 Opinion No. 17,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence was improper under the Fourth Amendment and Idaho Const. art. I, § 17 because defendant had an expectation of privacy in his garage and the officer had no warrant, no probable cause to arrest, and there were no exigent circumstances involved.
|
|||||
| Thomas v. Madsen, Docket No. 31172, 2006 Opinion No. 23,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding that respondent had an implied easement by prior use was proper where a driveway was intended to be permanent and where the claimed easement was reasonably necessary to the proper enjoyment of the property.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
