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.
6 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1963–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dawson v. CHEYOVICH FAMILY TRUSTgreen2 sentences2013Cf. Dawson v. Cheyovich Family Trust, 149 Idaho 375, 380 , 234 P.3d 699, 704 (2010) (holding that failure to rule on a timely and properly made motion is an abuse of discretion requiring remand). 8 Michael further asserts that the district court erred in denying his request for attorney fees on intermediate appeal and asks that we reverse the district court’s decision in that regard. 2013Cf. Dawson v. Cheyovich Family Trust, 149 Idaho 375, 380 , 234 P.3d 699, 704 (2010) (holding that failure to rule on a timely and properly made motion is an abuse of discretion requiring remand). 8 Michael further asserts that the district court erred in denying his request for attorney fees on intermediate appeal and asks that we reverse the district court’s decision in that regard. | 1 | 1 |
Suter v. Sutergreen2 sentences1985After reviewing statutory and case law relating to separate and community property, in the context of the facts of this case, the magistrate applied a rule stated in Suter v. Suter, 97 Idaho 461, 465 , 546 P.2d 1169, 1173 (1976): [W]hen community efforts, labor, industry, or funds enhance the value of separate property, such enhancement is community property for which the community is entitled to reimbursement. 1985After reviewing statutory and case law relating to separate and community property, in the context of the facts of this case, the magistrate applied a rule stated in Suter v. Suter, 97 Idaho 461, 465 , 546 P.2d 1169, 1173 (1976): [W]hen community efforts, labor, industry, or funds enhance the value of separate property, such enhancement is community property for which the community is entitled to reimbursement. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wymangreen2 sentences1982It is not necessary in this case to express an opinion as to whether a violation of the duty imposed by I.C. § 19-853(a)(2) might result in suppression of subsequent statements, but it is in order that law enforcement officers be made aware of it. [5] In regard to the need for an immediate arraignment before a magistrate when, as in this case, an arrest is made without a warrant, see State v. Wyman, 97 Idaho 486, 497 , 547 P.2d 531, 542 (1976) (Bakes, J., and McQuade, C.J., dissenting) ("the defendant's prolonged detention without being brought before a magistrate was a violation of his rights 1982It is not necessary in this case to express an opinion as to whether a violation of the duty imposed by I.C. § 19-853(a)(2) might result in suppression of subsequent statements, but it is in order that law enforcement officers be made aware of it. [5] In regard to the need for an immediate arraignment before a magistrate when, as in this case, an arrest is made without a warrant, see State v. Wyman, 97 Idaho 486, 497 , 547 P.2d 531, 542 (1976) (Bakes, J., and McQuade, C.J., dissenting) ("the defendant's prolonged detention without being brought before a magistrate was a violation of his rights | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
District of Columbia v. Benefield
neutral
2 sentences1990Despite the inevitable message which such appellate practice conveys, the Court in Stockwell concluded: ‘... our holding is a narrow one based upon the following circumstances of this case: (1) that the magistrate erred by preventing the state from reopening and introducing additional relevant evidence at the preliminary hearing; (2) that the record in this case does not suggest that the dismissal and refiling of the charge was done for harassment or delay or because the prosecutor had made no effort to present available evidence at the first preliminary hearing; and (3) the prosecutor followe 1977Despite the inevitable message which such appellate practice conveys, the Court in Stockwell concluded: . . .our holding is a narrow one based upon the following circumstances of this case: (1) that the magistrate erred by preventing the state from reopening and introducing additional relevant evidence at the preliminary hearing; (2) that the record in this case does not suggest that the dismissal and refiling of the charge was done for harassment or delay or because the prosecutor had made no effort to present available evidence at the first preliminary hearing; and (3) the prosecutor followe | 2 | 1977–1990 |
Lowe v. Skaggs Safeway Stores, Inc.
green
2 sentences1963"A. Yes." In Lowe v. Skaggs Safeway Stores, Inc., 49 Idaho 48 , 286 P. 616 , this Court held that full disclosure to a magistrate is a defense to an action for malicious prosecution. 1963"A. Yes." In Lowe v. Skaggs Safeway Stores, Inc., 49 Idaho 48 , 286 P. 616 , this Court held that full disclosure to a magistrate is a defense to an action for malicious prosecution. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
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.