insurer claim (Idaho) · Go Syfert
← Idaho issues

insurer claim in Idaho

6 Idaho opinions name it 1 courts 1966–2019 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
O'Daniel v. Ohio State Racing Commissiongreen
ohio · 1974 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978
1 sentence

1978Should the chemical or other analysis of saliva, urine, or blood specimens prove positive, showing the presence of any narcotic, stimulant, depressant, chemical or drug of any kind or description, the trainer of the horse, may, in the discretion of the commission, be subjected to any or all of the following penalties: suspension, revocation of license, being ruled off. . .” 307 N.E.2d at 530, n. 2 .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Pigg v. Brockman green
idaho · 1957
2 sentences

2019Id. at 244-45 , 314 P.2d at 616 .

2019Id. at 244-45 , 314 P.2d at 616 .

22019–2019
Farber v. State green
idaho · 1981
2 sentences

1991Sysco is supported by the discussion of the legislative intent behind the notice requirement of I.C. § 6-905 in the case of Farber v. State, 102 Idaho 398 , 630 P.2d 685 (1981): The purposes of I.C. § 6-905 are to (1) save needless expense and litigation by providing an opportunity for amicable resolution of the differences between parties, (2) allow authorities to conduct a full investigation into the cause of the injury in order to determine the extent of the state’s liability, if any, and (3) allow the state to prepare defenses. 102 Idaho at 401 , 630 P.2d at 688 .

1991Sysco is supported by the discussion of the legislative intent behind the notice requirement of I.C. § 6-905 in the case of Farber v. State, 102 Idaho 398 , 630 P.2d 685 (1981): The purposes of I.C. § 6-905 are to (1) save needless expense and litigation by providing an opportunity for amicable resolution of the differences between parties, (2) allow authorities to conduct a full investigation into the cause of the injury in order to determine the extent of the state’s liability, if any, and (3) allow the state to prepare defenses. 102 Idaho at 401 , 630 P.2d at 688 .

11991–1991
Sysco Intermountain Food Service v. City of Twin Falls neutral
idahoctapp · 1985
2 sentences

1991In Sysco the Court of Appeals held that notice to the city’s insurer of a claim against the city constituted substantial compliance with the notice requirement, and that the award of summary judgment against the plaintiff was therefore improper. 109 Idaho at 90-91 , 705 P.2d at 550-51 .

1991In Sysco the Court of Appeals held that notice to the city’s insurer of a claim against the city constituted substantial compliance with the notice requirement, and that the award of summary judgment against the plaintiff was therefore improper. 109 Idaho at 90-91 , 705 P.2d at 550-51 .

11991–1991
State of Idaho v. Bunker Hill Co. green
idd · 1986
1 sentence

1988Id. at 19 .” Bunker Hill, 647 F.Supp. at 1068 .

11988–1988
C. Raymond Davis & Sons, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance green
paed · 1979
2 sentences

1988Raymond Davis & Sons, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 467 F.Supp. 17 (E.D.Pa.1979): “However if coverage (indemnification) depends upon the existence or nonexistence of facts outside of the complaint that have yet to be determined, the insurer must provide a defense until such time as those facts are determined, and the claim is narrowed to one patently outside the coverage.

1988Id. at 19 .” Bunker Hill, 647 F.Supp. at 1068 .

11988–1988
Leach v. Farmer's Automobile Interinsurance Exchange green
idaho · 1950
1 sentence

1966Leach v. Farmer’s Automobile Interinsurance Exchange, supra. We recognize that in some jurisdictions the courts accord to the insurer a presumption of prejudice in such cases.

11966–1966

Where else courts name it

CA 98 (1936–2025) IL 58 (1902–2026) NY 46 (1947–2024) FL 37 (1936–2024) MI 34 (1978–2025) TX 32 (1935–2019) LA 30 (1932–2011) WI 27 (1923–2025) OH 22 (1963–2025) MO 21 (1926–2020) GA 20 (1907–2023) PA 20 (1950–2026) MN 18 (1976–2019) OK 18 (1918–2014) WA 18 (1987–2024) CT 18 (1971–2018) NJ 17 (1968–2024) AZ 16 (1977–2025) MA 15 (1973–2025) AL 10 (1929–2009) NM 10 (1948–2012) CO 10 (1992–2015) KS 9 (1942–2004) DE 8 (1988–2022) MD 7 (1972–2021) MT 7 (1983–2022) IN 7 (1957–2015) OR 7 (1957–2020) MS 6 (1971–2023) WV 6 (1961–2011) ID 6 (1966–2019) NC 6 (1961–2021) SD 5 (2009–2019) TN 5 (1964–2011) NE 5 (1941–2000) SC 5 (1939–2013) UT 5 (1938–2025) NV 4 (1932–2009) AK 4 (1990–2017) IA 4 (1918–2006) KY 4 (2006–2024) DC 4 (1974–2014) WY 3 (1980–1996) RI 3 (1994–2009) ME 3 (2009–2015) AR 2 (1914–1938) ND 2 (1994–2006) NH 2 (1979–1999) VA 2 (1987–1995) HI 2 (1924–1994)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check