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 1929–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Mallery v. Lewisgreen2 sentences2018See Mallery v. Lewis, 106 Idaho 227, 234 , 678 P.2d 19, 26 (1983) (holding that absent the “capable of repetition, yet evading review” exception to the mootness doctrine, pretrial detainees would not be afforded appellate review because detention for pretrial detainees averaged six to eight months). 2 violated the terms of probation, the second question is what should be the consequences of that violation. 2018See Mallery v. Lewis, 106 Idaho 227, 234 , 678 P.2d 19, 26 (1983) (holding that absent the “capable of repetition, yet evading review” exception to the mootness doctrine, pretrial detainees would not be afforded appellate review because detention for pretrial detainees averaged six to eight months). 2 violated the terms of probation, the second question is what should be the consequences of that violation. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Maxeygreen2 sentences1994State v. Maxey, 125 Idaho 516, 518 , 873 P.2d 161, 164 (Ct.App.1993). 1994State v. Maxey, 125 Idaho 516, 518 , 873 P.2d 161, 164 (Ct.App.1993). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Claytongreen2 sentences1993In State v. Clayton, 100 Idaho 896, 897 , 606 P.2d 1000, 1001 (1980), our Supreme Court cited section 19-857, as well as Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), for the rule that inasmuch as a defendant’s decision to reject court appointed counsel and conduct his own defense amounts to a waiver of the right to counsel, the “defendant should be made aware of the problems inherent in self-representation so that such waiver is knowingly and intelligently made.” In State v. Ruth, 102 Idaho 638 , 637 P.2d 415 (1981), the Court cited both Faretta and Clayton for 1993In State v. Clayton, 100 Idaho 896, 897 , 606 P.2d 1000, 1001 (1980), our Supreme Court cited section 19-857, as well as Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), for the rule that inasmuch as a defendant’s decision to reject court appointed counsel and conduct his own defense amounts to a waiver of the right to counsel, the “defendant should be made aware of the problems inherent in self-representation so that such waiver is knowingly and intelligently made.” In State v. Ruth, 102 Idaho 638 , 637 P.2d 415 (1981), the Court cited both Faretta and Clayton for | 1 | 1 |
State v. Monroegreen2 sentences1989State v. Monroe, 103 Idaho 129, 130 , 645 P.2d 363, 364 (1982); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 , 101 S.Ct. 1880 , 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). 1989State v. Monroe, 103 Idaho 129, 130 , 645 P.2d 363, 364 (1982); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 , 101 S.Ct. 1880 , 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Knutsen
green
2 sentences2017Id. 2017Id. | 4 | 2009–2017 |
Faretta v. California
green
2 sentences2010In Faretta , the Supreme Court found that the right to self-representation is implied by the structure of the Sixth Amendment: “The right to defend is given directly to the accused; for it is he who suffers the consequences if the defense fails.” 422 U.S. at 819-20 , 95 S.Ct. at 2533 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 572-73 . 2010In Faretta , the Supreme Court found that the right to self-representation is implied by the structure of the Sixth Amendment: “The right to defend is given directly to the accused; for it is he who suffers the consequences if the defense fails.” 422 U.S. at 819-20 , 95 S.Ct. at 2533 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 572-73 . | 3 | 1993–2010 |
Satterwhite v. Texas
green
2 sentences1990The Court in Satterwhite recognized that “the evaluation of the consequences of our error in the sentencing phase of a capital case may be more difficult because of the discretion that is given to the sentencer.” Id., 108 S.Ct. at 1798. 1990The Court in Satterwhite recognized that "the evaluation of the consequences of our error in the sentencing phase of a capital case may be more difficult because of the discretion that is given to the sentencer." Id., 108 S.Ct. at 1798. | 2 | 1989–1990 |
State v. Coby
green
2 sentences2004In State v. Coby, 128 Idaho 90 , 910 P.2d 762 (1996), a post-Custis decision, the trial court granted Goby’s motion to reduce his felony DUI charge on the basis that the State failed to present evidence that Coby was informed of the dangers of self-representation or that Coby understood the consequences of his waiver of counsel. 2004In State v. Coby, 128 Idaho 90 , 910 P.2d 762 (1996), a post-Custis decision, the trial court granted Goby’s motion to reduce his felony DUI charge on the basis that the State failed to present evidence that Coby was informed of the dangers of self-representation or that Coby understood the consequences of his waiver of counsel. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Neder v. United States
green
1 sentence2003Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Ruth
green
2 sentences1993In State v. Clayton, 100 Idaho 896, 897 , 606 P.2d 1000, 1001 (1980), our Supreme Court cited section 19-857, as well as Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), for the rule that inasmuch as a defendant’s decision to reject court appointed counsel and conduct his own defense amounts to a waiver of the right to counsel, the “defendant should be made aware of the problems inherent in self-representation so that such waiver is knowingly and intelligently made.” In State v. Ruth, 102 Idaho 638 , 637 P.2d 415 (1981), the Court cited both Faretta and Clayton for 1993In State v. Clayton, 100 Idaho 896, 897 , 606 P.2d 1000, 1001 (1980), our Supreme Court cited section 19-857, as well as Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), for the rule that inasmuch as a defendant’s decision to reject court appointed counsel and conduct his own defense amounts to a waiver of the right to counsel, the “defendant should be made aware of the problems inherent in self-representation so that such waiver is knowingly and intelligently made.” In State v. Ruth, 102 Idaho 638 , 637 P.2d 415 (1981), the Court cited both Faretta and Clayton for | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Edwards v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1989State v. Monroe, 103 Idaho 129, 130 , 645 P.2d 363, 364 (1982); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 , 101 S.Ct. 1880 , 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). 1989State v. Monroe, 103 Idaho 129, 130 , 645 P.2d 363, 364 (1982); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 , 101 S.Ct. 1880 , 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Chapman v. California
red
2 sentences1989The question ... is not whether the legally admitted evidence was sufficient to support the death sentence, which we assume it was, but rather, whether the State has proved "beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained." ( Citing Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967).) 486 U.S. at ___, 108 S.Ct. at 1798, 100 L.Ed.2d at 290 . 1989The question ... is not whether the legally admitted evidence was sufficient to support the death sentence, which we assume it was, but rather, whether the State has proved "beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained." ( Citing Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967).) 486 U.S. at ___, 108 S.Ct. at 1798, 100 L.Ed.2d at 290 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Durant v. Snyder
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Elliott v. Craig
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Shepherd v. Dougan
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Points v. Turner
neutral
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co.
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Hancock v. Elkington
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Burnham v. Henderson
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Knudsen v. Lythman
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Childs v. Reed
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
McKinney v. Merritt
green
2 sentences1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa 1958Childs v. Reed, 34 Idaho 450 , 202 P. 685 ; McKinney v. Merritt, 35 Idaho 600 , 208 P. 244 ; Hart v. Turner, 39 Idaho 50 , 226 P. 282 ; Elliott v. Craig, 45 Idaho 15 , 260 P. 433 ; Burnham v. Henderson, 47 Idaho 687 , 278 P. 221 ; Shepherd v. Dougan, 58 Idaho 543 , 76 P.2d 442 ; Intermountain Realty Co. v. Allen, 60 Idaho 228 , 90 P.2d 704 , 122 A.L.R. 647 ; Little v. Bergdahl Oil Co., 60 Idaho 662 , 95 P.2d 833 ; Durant v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678 , 151 P.2d 776 ; Hancock v. Elkington, 67 Idaho 542 , 186 P.2d 494 .” In the case of Knudsen v. Lythman, 33 Idaho 794 , 200 P. 130, 132 , this Court sa | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Zimmerman v. Brown
green
2 sentences1929J., p. 423; Zimmerman v. Brown, 30 Ida. 640 , 166 Pac. 924 .) The consequences of its violation are: (1) Punishment by fine; (2) a rule of evidence, which is that failure to file the certificate shall be prima facie evidence of fraud in securing credit; and (3) inability to maintain a suit. 1929J., p. 423; Zimmerman v. Brown, 30 Ida. 640 , 166 Pac. 924 .) The consequences of its violation are: (1) Punishment by fine; (2) a rule of evidence, which is that failure to file the certificate shall be prima facie evidence of fraud in securing credit; and (3) inability to maintain a suit. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
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.