Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Idaho courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Dodge v. Bonners Ferry Police Departmentgreen2 sentences2020See, e.g., Dodge v. Bonners Ferry Police Dep’t, 165 Idaho 650 ,___, 450 P.3d 298 , 302 (2019) (holding that because the court found failure to file a notice of a tort claim dispositive, the court need not address an alternative issue regarding a bond requirement). 2020See, e.g., Dodge v. Bonners Ferry Police Dep’t, 165 Idaho 650 ,___, 450 P.3d 298 , 302 (2019) (holding that because the court found failure to file a notice of a tort claim dispositive, the court need not address an alternative issue regarding a bond requirement). | 1 | 1 |
Felder v. Caseygreen2 sentences2007In Felder v. Casey, 487 U.S. 131, 144 , 108 S.Ct. 2302, 2309-10 , 101 L.Ed.2d 123, 141-42 (1988), the United States Supreme Court held that notice requirements of a state tort claims act could not be applied to bar an action for violation of federal civil rights law. 2007In Felder v. Casey, 487 U.S. 131, 144 , 108 S.Ct. 2302, 2309-10 , 101 L.Ed.2d 123, 141-42 (1988), the United States Supreme Court held that notice requirements of a state tort claims act could not be applied to bar an action for violation of federal civil rights law. | 1 | 1 |
Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay Viewgreen2 sentences1983See, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., 395 U.S. 337 , 89 S.Ct. 1820 , 23 L.Ed.2d 349 (1969); Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 , 92 S.Ct. 1983 , 32 L.Ed.2d 556 (1972). 1983See, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., 395 U.S. 337 , 89 S.Ct. 1820 , 23 L.Ed.2d 349 (1969); Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 , 92 S.Ct. 1983 , 32 L.Ed.2d 556 (1972). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hyde v. Fisher
green
2 sentences2008Hyde, 143 Idaho at 785 , 152 P.3d at 656 . 2008Hyde, 143 Idaho at 785 , 152 P.3d at 656 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Graves v. Cogswell
green
2 sentences1984I WAIVER OF THE SURETY BOND REQUIREMENT The Tarboxes rely on Graves v. Cogs-well, 97 Idaho 716 , 552 P.2d 224 (1976), as authority for their contention that the district court erred by not waiving the bond requirement altogether. 1984I WAIVER OF THE SURETY BOND REQUIREMENT The Tarboxes rely on Graves v. Cogs-well, 97 Idaho 716 , 552 P.2d 224 (1976), as authority for their contention that the district court erred by not waiving the bond requirement altogether. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Fuentes v. Shevin
green
2 sentences1983See, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., 395 U.S. 337 , 89 S.Ct. 1820 , 23 L.Ed.2d 349 (1969); Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 , 92 S.Ct. 1983 , 32 L.Ed.2d 556 (1972). 1983See, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., 395 U.S. 337 , 89 S.Ct. 1820 , 23 L.Ed.2d 349 (1969); Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 , 92 S.Ct. 1983 , 32 L.Ed.2d 556 (1972). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.