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.
16 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Robinson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurancegreen2 sentences2025Co., 137 Idaho 173, 178 , 45 P.3d 829, 834 (2002) (explaining that a plaintiff has the burden of establishing coverage under a policy to prevail on a bad faith claim even if the claim is paid)). 2025Co., 137 Idaho 173, 178 , 45 P.3d 829, 834 (2002) (explaining that a plaintiff has the burden of establishing coverage under a policy to prevail on a bad faith claim even if the claim is paid)). | 2 | 3 |
Hettwer v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Idahogreen2 sentences2018Id. at 375 , 797 P.2d at 83 (Bistline, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). 2018Id. at 375 , 797 P.2d at 83 (Bistline, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). | 1 | 2 |
Cedillo v. Farmers Insurance Co of Idahogreen2 sentences2017Co., 158 Idaho 154, 166 , 345 P.3d 213, 225 (2015) (“Cedillo I”). 5 Meanwhile, Ms. Cedillo also pursued a bad faith claim against Farmers in the district court. 2017Co., 158 Idaho 154, 166 , 345 P.3d 213, 225 (2015) (“Cedillo I”). 5 Meanwhile, Ms. Cedillo also pursued a bad faith claim against Farmers in the district court. | 1 | 1 |
Parks v. Safeco Ins Co of Illinoisgreen2 sentences2017Co. of Illinois, 160 Idaho 556, 562 , 376 P.3d 760, 766 (2016) (quoting Robinson v. State Farm Mut. 2017Co. of Illinois, 160 Idaho 556, 562 , 376 P.3d 760, 766 (2016) (quoting Robinson v. State Farm Mut. | 1 | 1 |
Christina J. Greenfield v. Ian D. Smithgreen2 sentences2017Poor claims management standing alone is not enough to make out a bad faith claim.” In my opinion, that statement oversimplifies Paul’s testimony and results in a misapplication of the summary judgment standard, which requires us to construe all facts in “the light most favorable to the non- moving party and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the record are to be drawn in favor of the non-moving party.” Greenfield v. Smith, 162 Idaho 246 , ___, 395 P.3d 1279, 1282 (2017). 2017Poor claims management standing alone is not enough to make out a bad faith claim.” In my opinion, that statement oversimplifies Paul’s testimony and results in a misapplication of the summary judgment standard, which requires us to construe all facts in “the light most favorable to the non- moving party and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the record are to be drawn in favor of the non-moving party.” Greenfield v. Smith, 162 Idaho 246 , ___, 395 P.3d 1279, 1282 (2017). | 1 | 1 |
Julie Holmgren v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Julie Holmgren v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Companygreen1 sentence2017Cf. Holmgren, 976 F.2d at 577 (explaining that, in bad faith claims, the mental impressions and opinions of the insurer are directly at issue). | 1 | 1 |
Patrons Mutual Ins. Ass'n v. Norwoodgreen2 sentences2010Ass’n v. Norwood, 231 Kan. 709 , 647 P.2d 1335,1338 (1982) (quotation omitted; empha sis added). 8 Because the claimant must be able to show the extent of his or her damages, “a bad faith claim either does not exist or should be held in abeyance until there is a final resolution of the contractual coverage claim.” Martin v. State Farm, Mut. 2010Ass’n v. Norwood, 231 Kan. 709 , 647 P.2d 1335,1338 (1982) (quotation omitted; empha sis added). 8 Because the claimant must be able to show the extent of his or her damages, “a bad faith claim either does not exist or should be held in abeyance until there is a final resolution of the contractual coverage claim.” Martin v. State Farm, Mut. | 1 | 1 |
Houghland Farms, Inc. v. Johnsongreen2 sentences1998Generally, “the rule of stare decisis dictates that we follow [controlling precedent], 'unless it is manifestly wrong, unless it has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or unless overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustice.” Houghland Farms Inc. v. Johnson, 119 Idaho 72, 77 , 803 P.2d 978, 983 (1990). 1998Generally, "the rule of stare decisis dictates that we follow [controlling precedent], unless it is manifestly wrong, unless it has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or unless overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustice." Houghland Farms Inc. v. Johnson, 119 Idaho 72, 77 , 803 P.2d 978, 983 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
Mecham v. Nelsongreen2 sentences1996See, e.g., Mecham v. Nelson, 92 Idaho 783, 789 , 451 P.2d 529, 535 (1969) (applying the bad faith rule to unlawful detainer statute’s treble damage provision). 1996See, e.g., Mecham v. Nelson, 92 Idaho 783, 789 , 451 P.2d 529, 535 (1969) (applying the bad faith rule to unlawful detainer statute’s treble damage provision). | 1 | 1 |
O'DELL v. Basabegreen1 sentence1991Thus, no Idaho case has adopted or even recognized a bad faith exception to the duty to mitigate. *1109 The court goes on to state: "Having considered the issues of bad faith and reasonableness, the jury found that the conduct surrounding the breach of the employment contract involved a violation by Simplot ..." and "imposed punitive damages against Simplot for willful violations ..." of the Human Rights Act, and concludes that, "Under these circumstances a bad faith breach was established... ." Ante at 816, 810 P.2d at 1102 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
White v. Unigard Mutual Insurance
green
2 sentences1999In White v. Unigard Mutual Insurance Co., 112 Idaho 94 , 730 P.2d 1014 (1986), this Court held that in order to recover on a bad faith claim, the insured must show: (1) the insurer intentionally and unreasonably denied or delayed payment; (2) the claim was not fairly debatable; (3) the denial or delay of payment was not the result of a good faith mistake; and (4) the resulting harm is not fully compensable by contract damages. 1999In White v. Unigard Mutual Insurance Co., 112 Idaho 94 , 730 P.2d 1014 (1986), this Court held that in order to recover on a bad faith claim, the insured must show: (1) the insurer intentionally and unreasonably denied or delayed payment; (2) the claim was not fairly debatable; (3) the denial or delay of payment was not the result of a good faith mistake; and (4) the resulting harm is not fully compensable by contract damages. | 2 | 1998–1999 |
Alderson v. Bonner
green
2 sentences2014Alderson v. Bonner, 142 Idaho 733 , 739, 132 P.3d 1261 , 1267 (Ct. App. 2006). 2014Alderson v. Bonner, 142 Idaho 733 , 739, 132 P.3d 1261 , 1267 (Ct. App. 2006). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Houghland Farms, Inc. v. Johnson
green
2 sentences1998Generally, “the rule of stare decisis dictates that we follow [controlling precedent], 'unless it is manifestly wrong, unless it has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or unless overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustice.” Houghland Farms Inc. v. Johnson, 119 Idaho 72, 77 , 803 P.2d 978, 983 (1990). 1998Generally, "the rule of stare decisis dictates that we follow [controlling precedent], unless it is manifestly wrong, unless it has proven over time to be unjust or unwise, or unless overruling it is necessary to vindicate plain, obvious principles of law and remedy continued injustice." Houghland Farms Inc. v. Johnson, 119 Idaho 72, 77 , 803 P.2d 978, 983 (1990). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Doty v. Bishara
green
2 sentences1996On appeal, in Doty v. Bishara, 123 Idaho 329 , 848 P.2d 387 (1992), we ordered reversal of the district court’s judgment and remanded the case for a new trial. 1996On appeal, in Doty v. Bishara, 123 Idaho 329 , 848 P.2d 387 (1992), we ordered reversal of the district court’s judgment and remanded the case for a new trial. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Arizona v. Youngblood
green
2 sentences1996Youngblood, 488 U.S. at 58 , 109 S.Ct. at 337 . 1996Youngblood, 488 U.S. at 58 , 109 S.Ct. at 337 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Robertson v. Richards
green
2 sentences1991Robertson v. Richards, 115 Idaho 628 , 769 P.2d 505 (1989) (failure of the trial court to instruct the jury on the definition of proximate cause required the setting aside of the jury’s verdict and granting a new trial). 1991Robertson v. Richards, 115 Idaho 628 , 769 P.2d 505 (1989) (failure of the trial court to instruct the jury on the definition of proximate cause required the setting aside of the jury’s verdict and granting a new trial). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Foley v. Interactive Data Corp.
green
2 sentences1989As the court stated in Foley , "Resolution of the ensuing inquiry into the employer's motives has been difficult to predict and demonstrates the imprecision of the standards thus far formulated." *750 254 Cal. Rptr. at 238 , 765 P.2d at 400 . 1989As the court stated in Foley , "Resolution of the ensuing inquiry into the employer's motives has been difficult to predict and demonstrates the imprecision of the standards thus far formulated." *750 254 Cal. Rptr. at 238 , 765 P.2d at 400 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.