 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Desilet v. Glass Doctor, Docket No. 31972, 2006 Opinion No. 27,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Discharged worker was not entitled to unemployment benefits because worker's misconduct in smoking marijuana off the job was closely connected to employer's business interests, and worker was not entitled to benefits simply because employer did not comply with Idaho Private Employer Alcohol and Drug-Free Workplace Act, Idaho Code § 72-1701 et seq.
|
|||||
| Gillespie v. Mt. Park Estates, L.L.C., Docket No. 31805, 2006 Opinion No. 25,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's findings did not support the buyers' claim of fraud against the homebuilder where district court did not find that homebuilder had no intent of repurchasing lot at time he promised to do so; it did not find that homebuilder's statement was false. Homebuilder was not entitled to attorney fees under Idaho Code § 12-120(1).
|
|||||
| Idaho Press Club, Inc. v. State Legislature , Docket No. 31667, 2006 Opinion No. 24,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In dispute about whether legislative committees were required to have open meetings, supreme court ruled that it did not have power to order open meetings because Idaho Const. art. III, § 12, did not apply to legislative committee meetings; the constitution did not limit the power of the legislature to close its legislative committee meetings.
|
|||||
| Leavitt v. Leavitt, Docket No. 31350, 2006 Opinion No. 29,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Idaho Code Ann. § 32-719, a magistrate court did not err in denying grandmother further visitation as (1) relationship between father and grandmother had degenerated into a highly adversarial one that affected the stability of the grandchild's life; and (2) the grandchild's behavior had improved since grandmother's visitation was terminated.
|
|||||
| Magee v. Thompson Creek Mining Co., Docket No. 31509, 2006 Opinion No. 26,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In worker's compensation matter, Idaho Industrial Commission did not clearly err in concluding that injured oil field worker had incurred a permanent partial disability of 20 percent of the whole person, inclusive of his 10 percent permanent impairment rating, because Commission properly focused on worker's ability to engage in gainful employment.
|
|||||
| Sons & Daughters of Idaho, Inc. v. Idaho Lottery Comm'n, Docket No. 31609, 2006 Opinion No. 30,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a challenge to a requirement that bingo operators must track bingo paper, supreme court rejected organization's argument that Idaho Admin. Code r. 52.01.02.106.01 was unconstitutionally vague because this rule was better read in the context of other provisions of the Gaming Rules, Idaho Admin. Code r. 52.01.02.
|
|||||
| State v. Mercer, Docket No. 32430, 2006 Opinion No. 28,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In trial for intimidating witness, defendant's motion for acquittal was properly denied because, pursuant to Idaho Code § 18-2604(3), a defendant had to act with intent of intimidating a witness "from testifying freely, fully and truthfully." There was no requirement that a defendant be ultimately successful in his efforts.
|
|||||
| Brandon Bay, Ltd. P'ship v. Payette County, Docket No. 31910, 2006 Opinion No. 32,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When determining the market value of low-income housing developments, the value of I.R.C. § 42 tax credits should be included in the assessment; federal low-income housing tax credits were part of the stream of benefits that came from the property and could be considered equivalent to income.
|
|||||
| VFP VC, Ltd. P'ship v. Dakota Co., Docket No. 31749, 2006 Opinion No. 31,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's order denying the corporation's request for relief from the oversight orders was proper where, pursuant to Idaho R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5) and (6), the corporation's evidence only addressed its argument that applying the judgment was no longer equitable. The corporation failed to provide evidence supporting any other ground for relief.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
