12 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ada County Highway District v. Total Success Investment, LLCgreen2 sentences2015Highway Dist. v. Total Success Invs., LLC, 145 Idaho 360, 370 , 179 P.3d 323, 333 (2008) (citation omitted)). 2015Highway Dist. v. Total Success Invs., LLC, 145 Idaho 360, 370 , 179 P.3d 323, 333 (2008) (citation omitted)). | 4 | 4 |
Kirkman v. Stokergreen2 sentences2024The clean hands doctrine provides that “a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent and deceitful as to the controversy in issue.” Jordan v. Walmart Assocs., Inc., ___ Idaho ___, ___, 539 P.3d 593, 603 (2023) (quoting Kirkman v. Stoker, 134 Idaho 541, 544 , 6 P.3d 397, 400 (2000)). 2024The clean hands doctrine provides that “a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent and deceitful as to the controversy in issue.” Jordan v. Walmart Assocs., Inc., ___ Idaho ___, ___, 539 P.3d 593, 603 (2023) (quoting Kirkman v. Stoker, 134 Idaho 541, 544 , 6 P.3d 397, 400 (2000)). | 3 | 3 |
Gilbert v. Nampa School District No. 131green2 sentences1993Nevertheless, the clean hands doctrine “is not a judicial straight jacket; it does not require that those who invoke equity should have led blameless lives, or operate so as to repel all sinners from a court of equity, nor does it apply to every unconscientious act of a party.” Gilbert, 104 Idaho at 145-46 , 657 P.2d at 9 -10 quoting 30 C.J.S. 1993Nevertheless, the clean hands doctrine “is not a judicial straight jacket; it does not require that those who invoke equity should have led blameless lives, or operate so as to repel all sinners from a court of equity, nor does it apply to every unconscientious act of a party.” Gilbert, 104 Idaho at 145-46 , 657 P.2d at 9 -10 quoting 30 C.J.S. | 1 | 3 |
Jordan v. Walmart Associates, Inc.green1 sentence2024The clean hands doctrine provides that “a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent and deceitful as to the controversy in issue.” Jordan v. Walmart Assocs., Inc., ___ Idaho ___, ___, 539 P.3d 593, 603 (2023) (quoting Kirkman v. Stoker, 134 Idaho 541, 544 , 6 P.3d 397, 400 (2000)). | 1 | 1 |
McVicars v. Christensengreen2 sentences2015“The clean hands doctrine ‘stands for the proposition that a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent and deceitful as to the controversy in issue.’ ” McVicars v. Christensen, 156 Idaho 58, 63-64 , 320 P.3d 948, 953-54 (2014) (quoting Ada Cnty. 2015“The clean hands doctrine ‘stands for the proposition that a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent and deceitful as to the controversy in issue.’ ” McVicars v. Christensen, 156 Idaho 58, 63-64 , 320 P.3d 948, 953-54 (2014) (quoting Ada Cnty. | 1 | 1 |
Malcolm v. Hanmergreen2 sentences1983See Malcolm v. Hanmer, 64 Idaho 66 , 127 P.2d 331 (1942). 1983See Malcolm v. Hanmer, 64 Idaho 66 , 127 P.2d 331 (1942). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dursteler v. Dursteler
green
2 sentences1997Dursteler v. Dursteler, 108 Idaho 230 , 697 P.2d 1244 (Ct.App.1985). 1997Dursteler v. Dursteler, 108 Idaho 230 , 697 P.2d 1244 (Ct.App.1985). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
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.