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.
5 Idaho opinions name it 1 courts 1942–1998 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 |
|---|---|---|
Idaho Schools for Equal Educational Opportunity v. Evansgreen2 sentences1998This Court adhered to this conclusion in ISEEO I. 123 Idaho at 579-80 , 850 P.2d at 740-41 (stating that "the uniformity requirement in the education clause requires only uniformity in curriculum, not uniformity in funding"). 1998This Court adhered to this conclusion in ISEEO I. 123 Idaho at 579-80 , 850 P.2d at 740-41 (stating that "the uniformity requirement in the education clause requires only uniformity in curriculum, not uniformity in funding"). | 2 | 3 |
Thompson v. Engelkinggreen2 sentences1998In Thompson v. Engelking, 96 Idaho 793, 805 , 537 P.2d 635, 647 (1975), this Court concluded that the uniformity requirement of Article IX, § 1 applies only to uniformity in curriculum, not uniformity in funding. 1998In Thompson v. Engelking, 96 Idaho 793, 805 , 537 P.2d 635, 647 (1975), this Court concluded that the uniformity requirement of Article IX, § 1 applies only to uniformity in curriculum, not uniformity in funding. | 2 | 2 |
In re Schribergreen2 sentences1967See In re Schriber, 19 Idaho 531 , 114 P. 29 , 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 693 (1911); Stein v. Morrison, 9 Idaho 426 , 75 P. 246 (1904). 1967See In re Schriber, 19 Idaho 531 , 114 P. 29 , 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 693 (1911); Stein v. Morrison, 9 Idaho 426 , 75 P. 246 (1904). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stein v. Morrison
green
2 sentences1967See In re Schriber, 19 Idaho 531 , 114 P. 29 , 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 693 (1911); Stein v. Morrison, 9 Idaho 426 , 75 P. 246 (1904). 1967See In re Schriber, 19 Idaho 531 , 114 P. 29 , 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 693 (1911); Stein v. Morrison, 9 Idaho 426 , 75 P. 246 (1904). | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Idaho County v. Fenn Highway District
neutral
2 sentences1942The uniformity provision of sec. 5, art. 7 of the constitution, is not violated by reason of the fact that another taxing unit within the state has a heavier or lighter tax rate than plaintiff. ( Idaho County v. Fenn Highway Dist. , 43 Idaho 233 , 253 P. 377 , 106 A.L.R., p. 920n; Scandrett v. Shoshone County et al. , supra.) All that the uniformity clause requires is, that the rate "shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits, of the authority levying the tax." ( Scandrett v. Shoshone County, supra. ) There is no contention that the contract here involved re 1942The uniformity provision of sec. 5, art. 7 of the constitution, is not violated by reason of the fact that another taxing unit within the state has a heavier or lighter tax rate than plaintiff. ( Idaho County v. Fenn Highway Dist. , 43 Idaho 233 , 253 P. 377 , 106 A.L.R., p. 920n; Scandrett v. Shoshone County et al. , supra.) All that the uniformity clause requires is, that the rate "shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits, of the authority levying the tax." ( Scandrett v. Shoshone County, supra. ) There is no contention that the contract here involved re | 1 | 1942–1942 |
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.