 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dep't of Transp. v. Gibbar (In re Gibbar), Docket No. 31840, 2006 Opinion No. 78,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, November 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's one-year administrative license suspension under Idaho Code Ann. § 18-8002A was proper because officer had legal cause to stop and probable cause to arrest defendant for driving while intoxicated and officer was permitted to time the 15-minute wait requirement for BAC test by his wristwatch rather than using the Intoxilyzer printout.
|
|||||
| State v. Garcia, Docket No. 32191, 2006 Opinion No. 79,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, November 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officers' statement that defendant would be subject to arrest if he did not turn over what drugs he had did not render defendant's consent to the search of his truck involuntary because the officers possessed probable cause to arrest defendant for delivery of marijuana in violation of Idaho Code Ann. § 37-2732(a)(1)(B).
|
|||||
| Sherer v. Pocatello Sch. Dist. # 25, Docket No. 31681, 2006 Opinion No. 100,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, November 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment should not have been granted to a school district in a negligence action arising from injuries suffered during activities provided to students by an independent contractor because, inter alia, Idaho Code Ann. § 6-904A(2) did not limit a direct claim that the school planned an unreasonably dangerous activity.
|
|||||
| Paolini v. Albertson's, Inc., Docket No. 32495, 2006 Opinion No. 101,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, November 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a labor case certified for review from a federal appellate court, it was determined that stock options were not wages under Idaho Code Ann. §§ 45-608(1), 45-601(7) because that form of compensation was not payable in cash, with a check, or by deposit into an employee's bank account.
|
|||||
| State v. Klingler, Docket No. 32527/30176, 2006 Opinion No. 103,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, November 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though defendant did not consent to warrantless searches by probation officers when his probation was revoked under Idaho Code Ann. § 20-222 and then reinstated, his rights under the Fourth Amendment and Idaho Const. art. I, § 17 were not violated by such since all probationers, supervised or not, had a reduced expectation of privacy.
|
|||||
| Crabtree v. State, Docket No. 32196, 2006 Opinion No. 80,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IDAHO, November 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A denial of a motion for post-conviction relief was reversed because a district court's notice of intent to dismiss under Idaho Code Ann. § 19-4906 failed to set forth with specificity and particularity the legal deficiencies or what additional facts should have been included to warrant a hearing.
|
|||||
| Huff v. Singleton, Docket No. 32259, 2006 Opinion No. 104,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, November 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed Idaho Industrial Commission's denial of unemployment insurance benefits under Idaho Code Ann. § 72-1366(5). Pro se appellant failed to meet Idaho App. R. 35 requirements as to seven claims. Pursuant to Idaho Const. art. V, § 9, court could not disturb finding, that appellant was fired, because substantial evidence supported finding.
|
|||||
| J.R. Simplot Co. v. Bosen, Docket No. 31706, 2006 Opinion No. 105,
SUPREME COURT OF IDAHO, November 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in finding that the husband, as individual, had personal liability on contract to obtain goods and services for limited liability company; husband's statement that he did not enter into agreement did not create issue of material fact. Corporation was entitled to award of attorney fees pursuant to Idaho Code § 12-120(3).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
