 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bach v. Miller, Docket No. 31658, 2007 Opinion No. 57,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court erred by awarding restitution for improvements to property under Idaho Code Ann. § 6-414 in a quiet title action because it was determined that fraud had been committed; a deliberate attempt to deprive another of property could not have constituted good faith.
|
|||||
| Idaho State Police v. Real Prop. Situated in County of Cassia, Docket No. 32593, 2007 Opinion No. 55,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a forfeiture proceeding under Idaho Code Ann. § 37-2744A, a district court did not err by failing to set aside a default judgment in favor of the Idaho State Police under Idaho R. Civ. P. 60(b) because, even though excusable neglect or a mistake of fact was shown by an attorney's lack of action, no meritorious defense was shown.
|
|||||
| Nation v. State, Docket No. 31110, 2007 Opinion No. 56,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where forms containing corrections officers' personal information were disclosed to an inmate during criminal proceeding discovery, defendants were entitled to summary judgment in the officers' civil rights and tort suit because, inter alia, the prosecutor was entitled to immunity as to § 1983 claims, and the privacy and negligence claims failed.
|
|||||
| Rouse v. Household Fin. Corp., Docket No. 32886, 2007 Opinion No. 58,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to lender in suit brought by borrowers after their application for a life insurance policy was denied; there was no evidence an insurance contract was formed between lender and the borrowers once they refinanced their loan or that lender breached any duties in negligence it owed the borrowers.
|
|||||
| State v. Diaz, Docket No. 32422, 2007 Opinion No. 53,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Fourth Amendment and Idaho Const. art. I, § 17, seizure of defendant's blood fell within exception to warrant requirement as defendant had already given implied consent to evidentiary testing by driving on Idaho road, Idaho Code § 18-8002(9); under Idaho Code § 18-8002(6)(b), hospital personnel could withdraw blood upon probable cause.
|
|||||
| State v. Lewis, Docket No. 33069, 2007 Opinion No. 54,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 29, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment were not violated when audio recordings of his confession in a drug case were lost because there was no showing of bad faith on the part of the State where the loss of the recordings was unintentional; therefore, suppression of the evidence was improper.
|
|||||
| Crown Point Dev., Inc. v. City of Sun Valley, Docket No. 32264, 2007 Opinion No. 59,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The district court erred when it ordered that the city augment the record, Idaho Code § 67-5276(2), as the evidence was not made part of the agency record, was not properly supplemented to the record, and was not added to the record pursuant to agreement by both parties. The city failed to make proper factual findings, Idaho Code § 67-5248(1)(a).
|
|||||
| Withers v. Bogus Basin Rec. Ass'n, Docket No. 33098, 2007 Opinion No. 60,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, April 3, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Rope the skier tripped over was intended to eliminate, alter, control or lessen, a risk inherent in the sport of skiing within meaning of Idaho Code § 6-1103(10); skier's injuries did not result from a violation of Idaho Code § 6-1104 as she was not endangered by the operation of the chairlift, and her injuries were not caused by that operation.
|
|||||
| Stout v. Key Training Corp., Docket No. 32881, 2007 Opinion No. 61,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, April 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The employee was not entitled to attorney fees under Idaho Code § 67-5908(3) as the legislature did not intend expense of enforcement to fall under statute where federal law allowed for award of attorney fees when statute was enacted. Employee was not entitled to attorney fees under Idaho Code § 12-120(3) as she did not prevail on contract claim.
|
|||||
| Rios-Lopez v. State, Docket No. 32269, 2007 Opinion No. 19,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, April 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Due process under the United States or Idaho Constitutions was not violated by the denial of a motion to replace substitute counsel; under the three-prong test, an inmate had no constitutional right to counsel in such a proceeding, his presence was not necessary since the grounds were presented, and the State had an interest in completing the case.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
