Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 29-104 (2026)

Want of consideration — Burden of proof. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Want of consideration — Burden of proof. 

The burden of showing a want of consideration sufficient to support an instrument lies with the party seeking to invalidate or avoid it.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1937–2007 · leading case: W.L. Scott, Inc. v. Madras Aerotech, Inc., 653 P.2d 791 (Idaho 1982).
W.L. Scott, Inc. v. Madras Aerotech, Inc., 653 P.2d 791 (Idaho 1982). · cites it 4× “2d 638 (1963); I.C. § 29-104. It was necessary for appellant to introduce evidence to establish this defense.”
Lewis v. Fletcher, 617 P.2d 834 (Idaho 1980). · cites it 4× “The legal issue presented is whether a written and signed option contract, which contains a false recital of payment of consideration and acknowledgment of its receipt, is valid and enforceable.”
Best Hill Coalition v. HALKO, LLC, 172 P.3d 1088 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 4× “Furthermore, a written instrument is presumptive evidence of a consideration. I.C. § 29-103.”
Dennett v. Kuenzli, 936 P.2d 219 (Idaho Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Idaho Code § 29-104 specifies that, “The burden of showing want of consideration sufficient to support an instrument lies with the party seeking to invalidate or avoid it.”
Vaughn v. Vaughn, 428 P.2d 50 (Idaho 1967). · cites it 2× “Vaughn, * * the sum of Three Thousand Dollars * * The defendant, in his answer to the complaint, alleged lack of consideration of the note as an affirmative defense and thus he was faced with the burden of proof on that issue.”
Rosenberry v. Clark, 379 P.2d 638 (Idaho 1963). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 29-104: “Want of consideration — Burden of proof.”
Isaak v. Idaho First Nat'l Bank, 811 P.2d 832 (Idaho 1991). · cites it 2× “§ 6-101 nor § 6-108 require a mortgagee to bring a foreclosure action immediately after a default.”
Frasier v. Carter, 437 P.2d 32 (Idaho 1968). “§ 29-104. 3 . “If an action is pending against the decedent at the time of his death, the plaintiff must in like manner present his claim to the executor or administrator for allowance or rejection, authenticated as required in other cases; and no recovery shall be had in the…”
Isaguirre v. Echevarria, 534 P.2d 471 (Idaho 1975). “, § 29-104. “Appellant Lawrence, by such written instrument, agreed to pay for respondent’s services already rendered; it is unrelated to any oral contract to pay a commission for services yet to be performed.”
Homefinders v. Lawrence, 335 P.2d 893 (Idaho 1959). “, § 29-104. Appellant Lawrence, by such written instrument, agreed to pay for respondent’s services already rendered; it is unrelated to any oral contract to pay a commission for services yet to be performed.”
Oregon Short Line R. v. Ada Cnty., 18 F. Supp. 842 (D. Idaho 1937). “The laws of the state authorize a railroad company to acquire and own ground at its terminals for warehouses to be constructed thereon to facilitate the receipt and delivery of freight (sections 29-104, 29-114 and 29-508, Idaho Code); and the company may permit others to erect…”
Robertson v. Hansen, 403 P.2d 585 (Idaho 1965). “, § 29-104. “Appellant Lawrence, by such written instrument, agreed to pay for respondent’s services already rendered; it is unrelated to any oral contract to pay a commission for services yet to be performed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.