Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 32-704 (2026)

Allowance of support money, court costs and attorney fees — Representation of child.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Allowance of support money, court costs and attorney fees — Representation of child.

1. While an action for divorce is pending, the court may, in its discretion, on the motion of either party and upon showing made in conformity with section 32-705 or section 32-706, Idaho Code, whichever be appropriate, order the payment of temporary maintenance of either spouse by the other or temporary support of a child of the marriage, in amounts and on terms just and proper under the circumstances.

2. The court may, in its discretion, on the motion of either party enter a decree of legal separation, providing for custody of children, division of property, payment of debts, payment of child support, and payment of spousal support as set forth in the statutes governing domestic relations.

3. The court may from time to time after considering the financial resources of both parties and the factors set forth in section 32-705, Idaho Code, order a party to pay a reasonable amount for the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending any proceeding under this act and for attorney’s fees, including sums for legal services rendered and costs incurred prior to the commencement of the proceeding or after entry of judgment. The court may order that the amount be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in his name.

4. The court may appoint an attorney or guardian ad litem to represent the interests of a minor or dependent child with respect to his or her support, custody, and visitation, but only in those instances where the court deems legal representation or other assistance is necessary beyond any court ordered and court related services previously authorized for the particular case. The court shall enter an order for costs, fees, and disbursements in favor of the child’s attorney or guardian ad litem. The order shall be made against either or both parents, except, if both parties are indigent, the costs, fees, and disbursements shall be borne by the county in which the action is pending.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 123 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1941–2026 · leading case: Papin v. Papin, 454 P.3d 1092 (Idaho 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Papin v. Papin, 454 P.3d 1092 (Idaho 2019). · cites it 18× “The district court agreed, explaining that it “can see no necessity for the magistrate to run through each of the factors again to determine whether Veronika should be awarded fees under Idaho Code § 32-704.” We hold that, although the magistrate court did not analyze the…”

McGriff v. McGriff, 99 P.3d 111 (Idaho 2004). · cites it 24× “This Court has ruled: Pursuant to I.C. § 32-704, the district court has original jurisdiction in determining whether to require one spouse, during the pendency of an appeal from a judgment in a divorce action, to pay to the other spouse such sums as may be necessary for that…”

Pedro Pelayo v. Bertha Pelayo, 303 P.3d 214 (Idaho 2013). · cites it 11× “Idaho Code 32-704(3) provides: The court may from time to time after considering the financial resources of both parties and the factors set forth in section 32-705, Idaho Code, order a party to pay a reasonable amount for the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending…”

Kelly v. Kelly, 518 P.3d 326 (Idaho 2022). · cites it 12× “, 2d Reg. Sess. (Idaho 1980). 8 In this case, the district court determined that it did not need to address Brandi’s public policy argument concerning section 8.”

Jones v. Jones, 790 P.2d 914 (Idaho 1990). · cites it 34× “) Based on these two cases and the language of I.C. § 32-704, we conclude that although a showing of fault is required for an award of temporary maintenance under I.”

Jensen v. Jensen, 917 P.2d 757 (Idaho 1996). · cites it 30× “This misinterpretation of Exhibit 10 resulted in an incorrect analysis. VII. THE MAGISTRATE DID NOT ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN DENYING ATTORNEY FEES Carla contends that the magistrate abused its discretion by denying Carla attorney fees below, pursuant to I.”

Hentges v. Hentges, 765 P.2d 1094 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 14× “Idaho Code § 32-704 (2) is not the exclusive avenue available to a party seeking attorney fees in a divorce action.”

Beesley v. Beesley, 758 P.2d 695 (Idaho 1988). · cites it 24× “And, since the basis for the award of attorney fees is not apparent from the record, we invite the attention of the court and parties to I.C. § 32-704, [7] which reads in pertinent part: *702 Allowance of support money, court costs and attorney fees Representation of child.”

Stephanie Reed v. Scott Reed, 339 P.3d 1109 (Idaho 2014). · cites it 30× “9 Second, Rule 54(d)(5) does not apply to the award of attorney fees under Idaho Code section 32-704. Rule 54(d) applies to the awarding of costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party or parties in a civil action.”

David R. Davies v. Susan Davies, 368 P.3d 1017 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 26× “Susan filed a motion for attorney fees pursuant to I.C. § 32-704 and, on June. 17, 2013, the magistrate ordered David to pay $7,500 of Susan’s attorney fees.”

Ross v. Ross, 648 P.2d 1119 (Idaho 1982). · cites it 16× “Under I.C. § 32-704 after entry of a judgment, where a former wife has access to and control of *1123 her share of the community property, an award of attorney fees cannot be characterized as an award of "money necessary to enable the wife .”

Roberts v. Roberts, 64 P.3d 327 (Idaho 2003). · cites it 8× “ge abused his discretion in deciding to transfer custody of the children to Larry in the event Kimberly moves outside the Mini-Cassia area; (2) whether the magistrate incorrectly applied the California and New York law upon which he relied in reaching his decision; and (3)…”

Show all 123 citing cases →

— Idaho Code § 32-704(1) — 3 cases

Jones v. Jones, 790 P.2d 914 (Idaho 1990). “) Based on these two cases and the language of I.C. § 32-704, we conclude that although a showing of fault is required for an award of temporary maintenance under I.”

Nelson v. Evans, 464 P.3d 301 (Idaho 2020).

Stephanie Reed v. Scott Reed, 339 P.3d 1109 (Idaho 2014). “9 Second, Rule 54(d)(5) does not apply to the award of attorney fees under Idaho Code section 32-704. Rule 54(d) applies to the awarding of costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party or parties in a civil action.”

— Idaho Code § 32-704(2) — 15 cases

Hentges v. Hentges, 765 P.2d 1094 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). “Idaho Code § 32-704 (2) is not the exclusive avenue available to a party seeking attorney fees in a divorce action.”

Harney v. Weatherby, 781 P.2d 241 (Idaho Ct. App. 1989).

Yost v. Yost, 735 P.2d 988 (Idaho 1987).

Antill v. Antill, 908 P.2d 1261 (Idaho Ct. App. 1996).

— Idaho Code § 32-704(3) — 22 cases

Pedro Pelayo v. Bertha Pelayo, 303 P.3d 214 (Idaho 2013). “Idaho Code 32-704(3) provides: The court may from time to time after considering the financial resources of both parties and the factors set forth in section 32-705, Idaho Code, order a party to pay a reasonable amount for the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending…”

McGriff v. McGriff, 99 P.3d 111 (Idaho 2004). “This Court has ruled: Pursuant to I.C. § 32-704, the district court has original jurisdiction in determining whether to require one spouse, during the pendency of an appeal from a judgment in a divorce action, to pay to the other spouse such sums as may be necessary for that…”

Papin v. Papin, 454 P.3d 1092 (Idaho 2019). “The district court agreed, explaining that it “can see no necessity for the magistrate to run through each of the factors again to determine whether Veronika should be awarded fees under Idaho Code § 32-704.” We hold that, although the magistrate court did not analyze the…”

Browning v. Browning, 39 P.3d 631 (Idaho 2001).

Moffett v. Moffett, 253 P.3d 764 (Idaho Ct. App. 2011).

— Idaho Code § 32-704(4) — 3 cases

John Doe v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, 367 P.3d 136 (Idaho 2016).

Abolafia v. Reeves, 277 P.3d 345 (Idaho 2012).

Lowman v. Morgan-Smart, 564 P.3d 1203 (Idaho 2025).

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.