5 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1873–2005 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 |
|---|---|---|
Williams v. Paxtongreen2 sentences1985However since the Company’s motion for summary judgment stated that there were no factual issues in dispute and that the trial court could decide the constitutional issues as a matter of law, Williams v. Paxton, 98 Idaho 155, 163 , 559 P.2d 1123, 1131 (1976); Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974), and since the matters are purely those of law, and were fully briefed and argued before us we will decide these issues. 1985However since the Company’s motion for summary judgment stated that there were no factual issues in dispute and that the trial court could decide the constitutional issues as a matter of law, Williams v. Paxton, 98 Idaho 155, 163 , 559 P.2d 1123, 1131 (1976); Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974), and since the matters are purely those of law, and were fully briefed and argued before us we will decide these issues. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Clements v. Jungert
green
2 sentences2005In Clements v. Jungert, 90 Idaho 143 , 408 P.2d 810 (1965), our Supreme Court considered whether evidence was admissible to show that a liability insurance company's claims representative had stated that the company would provide defense counsel for the insured in a tort action filed by a third party. 2005In Clements v. Jungert, 90 Idaho 143 , 408 P.2d 810 (1965), our Supreme Court considered whether evidence was admissible to show that a liability insurance company's claims representative had stated that the company would provide defense counsel for the insured in a tort action filed by a third party. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
Thompson v. Hagan
green
2 sentences1985However since the Company’s motion for summary judgment stated that there were no factual issues in dispute and that the trial court could decide the constitutional issues as a matter of law, Williams v. Paxton, 98 Idaho 155, 163 , 559 P.2d 1123, 1131 (1976); Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974), and since the matters are purely those of law, and were fully briefed and argued before us we will decide these issues. 1985However since the Company’s motion for summary judgment stated that there were no factual issues in dispute and that the trial court could decide the constitutional issues as a matter of law, Williams v. Paxton, 98 Idaho 155, 163 , 559 P.2d 1123, 1131 (1976); Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974), and since the matters are purely those of law, and were fully briefed and argued before us we will decide these issues. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
O. P. Teets v. Chicago, South Shore and South Bend Railroad
green
1 sentence1974In Teets v. Chicago, South Shore & South Bend Railroad, 238 F.2d 223 (7th Cir. 1956), the court held that a question of fact was presented for resolution by the jury whether an employee of the railroad company had violated an operating rule of the company and whether such violation was a proximate cause which contributed in whole or in part to the employee’s injury. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Howe Machine Co. v. Snow
neutral
1 sentence1873Howe Machine Co. v. Snow, 32 Iowa, 433 . | 1 | 1873–1873 |
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.