rejection claim in Idaho

1974Following Stephens the Court decided the case of United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Clover Creek Cattle Co., 92 Idaho 889 , 452 P.2d 993 (1969), wherein, at least inferentially, Carter was recognized and a “preponderately reasonable” test was used to determine if an insurer’s rejection of a claim was just or unjust.

1974Following Stephens the Court decided the case of United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Clover Creek Cattle Co., 92 Idaho 889 , 452 P.2d 993 (1969), wherein, at least inferentially, Carter was recognized and a “preponderately reasonable” test was used to determine if an insurer’s rejection of a claim was just or unjust.

1974In Dawson v. Olson, 94 Idaho 636 , 496 P.2d 97 (1972), this Court set forth the holding of Carter as applying to uninsured motorist insurance cases as follows: “In Carter this Court established two rules: (1) In general, no amount is ‘justly due’ from the insurer until facts substantially indicative of the uninsured motorist’s liability are shown the insurer, or, in the absence of such facts, until the uninsured motorist’s liability is admitted or judicially declared. (2) Where the insurer is sued for attorney fees incurred in a separate successful action against the uninsured motorist, the in

1974In Dawson v. Olson, 94 Idaho 636 , 496 P.2d 97 (1972), this Court set forth the holding of Carter as applying to uninsured motorist insurance cases as follows: “In Carter this Court established two rules: (1) In general, no amount is ‘justly due’ from the insurer until facts substantially indicative of the uninsured motorist’s liability are shown the insurer, or, in the absence of such facts, until the uninsured motorist’s liability is admitted or judicially declared. (2) Where the insurer is sued for attorney fees incurred in a separate successful action against the uninsured motorist, the in

1945All individual storage water carried over by stockholders must be applied to beneficial use for irrigation in the year succeeding that in which it has been carried over and if not so used shall become a part of general storage.” The learned trial judge entered judgment sustaining the present rule. *201 Appellant urges that the condemnation of a somewhat similar rule in Glavin v. Salmon River Canal Co., Ltd., 44 Ida. 583 , 258 P. 532 , demands the rejection of this rule.

1945All individual storage water carried over by stockholders must be applied to beneficial use for irrigation in the year succeeding that in which it has been carried over and if not so used shall become a part of general storage.” The learned trial judge entered judgment sustaining the present rule. *201 Appellant urges that the condemnation of a somewhat similar rule in Glavin v. Salmon River Canal Co., Ltd., 44 Ida. 583 , 258 P. 532 , demands the rejection of this rule.

1928(See Drainage District No. 2 v. Extension Ditch Co., 32 Ida. 314 (319), 182 Pac. 847 .) It is also contended that the court erred: (1) In finding and concludihg that the present action was not commenced within three months after appellant was notified of the rejection of its claim; (2) in finding that the right to recovery of judgment for any deficiency against the estate of Miller is barred by the provisions of C.

1928(See Drainage District No. 2 v. Extension Ditch Co., 32 Ida. 314 (319), 182 Pac. 847 .) It is also contended that the court erred: (1) In finding and concludihg that the present action was not commenced within three months after appellant was notified of the rejection of its claim; (2) in finding that the right to recovery of judgment for any deficiency against the estate of Miller is barred by the provisions of C.

1925St. 76, 98 Pac. 857 .) Notice of the rejection of the claim must be given by the administrator to the claimant or his agent or attorney personally or by mail.