Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 41-259 (2026)

Inspection of buildings — Order of remedy or removal — Service of order. 

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

Inspection of buildings — Order of remedy or removal — Service of order. 

The state fire marshal, his deputies or assistants, upon the written and signed complaint of any person or whenever he or they shall deem it necessary, may at reasonable hours inspect buildings and premises within their jurisdiction, upon the presentation of proper credentials, except the interior of private dwellings, private garages appertaining to such residences, or buildings on farms of more than five (5) acres.

Whenever any of said officers shall find that any building or other structure which, for want of repairs, or lack of or insufficient fire escapes, automatic or other fire alarm apparatus or fire extinguishing equipment, or by reason of age or dilapidated condition, or due to violation of the International Fire Code or from any other cause, is especially liable to fire, and is so situated as to endanger life, other buildings or structures or said building or structure, he or they shall order the same to be remedied or removed, and such order shall forthwith be complied with by the owner or occupant of such premises or buildings, unless said owner or occupant avail himself of the appeals procedure set forth in this act.
The service of any such order shall be made upon the owner or occupant either by delivering to and leaving with the said person a true copy of the said order, or, by mailing such copy to the owner or occupant’s last known address. All mailings shall be registered or certified, with return receipt.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2017–2017 · leading case: Schweitzer Basin Water Co v. Schweitzer Fire Dist (Idaho 2017).
Schweitzer Basin Water Co v. Schweitzer Fire Dist (Idaho 2017). · cites it 32× “I.C. § 41-259 (emphasis added). The district court correctly held that “the Company’s water system can in no way be construed as a ‘building or other structure’ ” that would fall under the jurisdiction conveyed by Idaho Code section 41-259.”
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.