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.
28 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2023 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Miles v. Idaho Power Co. Ex Rel. Evansgreen2 sentences2023“The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wishes to have adjudicated.” Id. at 641 , 778 P.2d at 763 . 2023“The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wishes to have adjudicated.” Id. at 641 , 778 P.2d at 763 . | 13 | 23 |
Thomson v. City of Lewistongreen2 sentences2005“The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wished to have adjudicated....[T]o satisfy the ease or controversy requirement of standing, litigants generally must allege or demonstrate an injury in fact and a substantial likelihood that the judicial relief requested will prevent or redress the claimed injury.” Thomson v. City of Lewiston, 137 Idaho 473, 477 , 50 P.3d 488, 492 (2002). 2005“The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wished to have adjudicated....[T]o satisfy the ease or controversy requirement of standing, litigants generally must allege or demonstrate an injury in fact and a substantial likelihood that the judicial relief requested will prevent or redress the claimed injury.” Thomson v. City of Lewiston, 137 Idaho 473, 477 , 50 P.3d 488, 492 (2002). | 2 | 2 |
Boundary Backpackers v. Boundary Countygreen2 sentences2002"The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wishes to have adjudicated." 2. "[T]o satisfy the case or controversy requirement of standing, litigants generally must allege or demonstrate an injury in fact and a substantial likelihood that the judicial relief requested will prevent or redress the claimed injury." 3. "[A] citizen and taxpayer may not challenge a governmental enactment where the injury is one suffered alike by all citizens and taxpayers of the jurisdiction." Boundary Backpackers v. Boundary County, 128 Idaho 371, 375 , 913 P.2d 114 2002"The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wishes to have adjudicated." 2. "[T]o satisfy the case or controversy requirement of standing, litigants generally must allege or demonstrate an injury in fact and a substantial likelihood that the judicial relief requested will prevent or redress the claimed injury." 3. "[A] citizen and taxpayer may not challenge a governmental enactment where the injury is one suffered alike by all citizens and taxpayers of the jurisdiction." Boundary Backpackers v. Boundary County, 128 Idaho 371, 375 , 913 P.2d 114 | 2 | 2 |
Van Valkenburgh v. Citizens for Term Limitsgreen2 sentences2016“It is a fundamental tenet of American Jurisprudence that a person wishing to invoke a court’s jurisdiction must have standing.” Van Valkenburgh v. Citizens for Term Limits, 135 Idaho 121, 124 , 15 P.3d 1129, 1132 (2000). 2016“It is a fundamental tenet of American Jurisprudence that a person wishing to invoke a court’s jurisdiction must have standing.” Van Valkenburgh v. Citizens for Term Limits, 135 Idaho 121, 124 , 15 P.3d 1129, 1132 (2000). | 1 | 2 |
Bagley v. Thomasongreen2 sentences2013Bagley v. Thomason, 149 Idaho 806, 807 , 241 P.3d 979, 980 (2010). 2013Bagley v. Thomason, 149 Idaho 806, 807 , 241 P.3d 979, 980 (2010). | 1 | 1 |
Scona, Inc. v. Green Willow Trustgreen2 sentences2013“When an issue of standing is raised, the focus is not on the merits of the issues raised, but upon the party who is seeking the relief.” Scona, Inc. v. Green Willow Trust, 133 Idaho 283, 288 , 985 P.2d 1145, 1150 (1999). 2013“When an issue of standing is raised, the focus is not on the merits of the issues raised, but upon the party who is seeking the relief.” Scona, Inc. v. Green Willow Trust, 133 Idaho 283, 288 , 985 P.2d 1145, 1150 (1999). | 1 | 1 |
Doe v. Roegreen2 sentences2013“The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wished to have adjudicated.” Doe v. Roe, 142 Idaho 202, 204 , 127 P.3d 105, 107 (2005). 2013“The doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wished to have adjudicated.” Doe v. Roe, 142 Idaho 202, 204 , 127 P.3d 105, 107 (2005). | 1 | 1 |
Selkirk-Priest Basin Ass'n v. State ex rel. Battgreen2 sentences2000In order to satisfy the case or controversy requirement of standing, a litigant must "allege or demonstrate an injury in fact and a substantial likelihood that the judicial relief requested will prevent or redress the claimed injury." Miles, 116 Idaho at 641 , 778 P.2d at 763 ; see also Boundary Backpackers v. Boundary County, 128 Idaho 371, 375 , 913 P.2d 1141, 1145 (1996); Selkirk-Priest *1133 Basin Ass'n v. State, 128 Idaho 831, 833-34 , 919 P.2d 1032, 1034-35 (1996). 2000In order to satisfy the case or controversy requirement of standing, a litigant must "allege or demonstrate an injury in fact and a substantial likelihood that the judicial relief requested will prevent or redress the claimed injury." Miles, 116 Idaho at 641 , 778 P.2d at 763 ; see also Boundary Backpackers v. Boundary County, 128 Idaho 371, 375 , 913 P.2d 1141, 1145 (1996); Selkirk-Priest *1133 Basin Ass'n v. State, 128 Idaho 831, 833-34 , 919 P.2d 1032, 1034-35 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000This Court has previously stated, "[t]he doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wishes to have adjudicated." Miles v. Idaho Power Co., 116 Idaho 635, 641 , 778 P.2d 757, 763 (1989) (citing Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464 , 102 S.Ct. 752 , 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982)). 2000This Court has previously stated, "[t]he doctrine of standing focuses on the party seeking relief and not on the issues the party wishes to have adjudicated." Miles v. Idaho Power Co., 116 Idaho 635, 641 , 778 P.2d 757, 763 (1989) (citing Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464 , 102 S.Ct. 752 , 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982)). | 3 | 1989–2000 |
Life of the Land v. LAND USE COM'N, ETC.
green
1 sentence1999In order to fulfill the standing requirement, the plaintiff must “ ‘allege such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy’ as to warrant his invocation of the court’s jurisdiction.” Bentel, 104 Idaho at 135-36 , 656 P.2d at 1388 -89 (quoting Life of the Land, 623 P.2d at 438 ) (emphasis in original). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Bentel v. County of Bannock
green
2 sentences1999In order to fulfill the standing requirement, the plaintiff must “ ‘allege such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy’ as to warrant his invocation of the court’s jurisdiction.” Bentel, 104 Idaho at 135-36 , 656 P.2d at 1388 -89 (quoting Life of the Land, 623 P.2d at 438 ) (emphasis in original). 1999In order to fulfill the standing requirement, the plaintiff must “ ‘allege such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy’ as to warrant his invocation of the court’s jurisdiction.” Bentel, 104 Idaho at 135-36 , 656 P.2d at 1388 -89 (quoting Life of the Land, 623 P.2d at 438 ) (emphasis in original). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.