5 Idaho opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Meyer v. Skyline Mobile Homes
green
2 sentences2025In Meyer, this Court reversed the Commission’s determination that the claimant’s omission was “willful” because the Commission incorrectly “assumed that the willfulness requirement was satisfied by gross negligence on [the claimant’s] part.” 99 Idaho at 760–61, 589 P.2d at 95–96. 1984In effect, then, the commission may have assumed that the willfulness requirement was satisfied by gross negligence on Meyer’s part.” 99 Idaho at 761 , 589 P.2d at 96 . | 2 | 1984–2025 |
Meyer v. Skyline Mobile Homes
green
2 sentences2025In Meyer, this Court reversed the Commission’s determination that the claimant’s omission was “willful” because the Commission incorrectly “assumed that the willfulness requirement was satisfied by gross negligence on [the claimant’s] part.” 99 Idaho at 760–61, 589 P.2d at 95–96. 2025We reversed the Commission’s finding because it “may have assumed that the willfulness requirement was satisfied by gross negligence on [the claimant’s] part.” Id. | 2 | 1984–2025 |
State v. Billings
green
2 sentences2025Id. 2022Id. 7 Then, in State v. Pole, 139 Idaho 370 , 79 P.3d 729 (Ct. App. 2003), the Court of Appeals again considered the requisite mental state for battery under Idaho Code section 18-903(a). | 2 | 2022–2025 |
State v. Pole
green
2 sentences2022Id. 7 Then, in State v. Pole, 139 Idaho 370 , 79 P.3d 729 (Ct. App. 2003), the Court of Appeals again considered the requisite mental state for battery under Idaho Code section 18-903(a). 2022Id. 7 Then, in State v. Pole, 139 Idaho 370 , 79 P.3d 729 (Ct. App. 2003), the Court of Appeals again considered the requisite mental state for battery under Idaho Code section 18-903(a). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
cluster 363121
green
1 sentence2018Mazo , 591 F.2d at 1155 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
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.