Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 5-201 (2026)

Limitations in general. 

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

Limitations in general. 

Civil actions can only be commenced within the periods prescribed in this chapter after the cause of action shall have accrued, except when, in special cases, a different limitation is prescribed by statute.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1952–2025 · leading case: Billings v. Sisters of Mercy of Idaho, 389 P.2d 224 (Idaho 1964).
Billings v. Sisters of Mercy of Idaho, 389 P.2d 224 (Idaho 1964). · cites it 30× “The applicable statutes are I.C. § 5-201 and § 5-219, which read as follows: § 5-201 "Civil actions can only be commenced within the periods prescribed in this chapter after the cause of action shall have accrued, * * *.”
Carol English v. James Taylor, D.O., 378 P.3d 1036 (Idaho 2016). · cites it 12× “I.C. §§ 5-201, 5-219 (emphasis added). Except for actions based upon leaving a foreign object in a person’s body or where the fact of damage has been fraudulently and knowingly concealed, the cause of action for professional malpractice accrues “as of the time of the occurrence,…”
Lapham v. Stewart, 51 P.3d 396 (Idaho 2002). · cites it 4× “Idaho Code §§ 5-201 & 5-219 (1998). 2 Except for actions based *586 upon leaving a foreign object in a person’s body or where the fact of damage has been fraudulently and knowingly concealed, 3 the cause of action for professional malpractice accrues “as of the time of the…”
Guzman v. Piercy / Canyon Cnty. / Sutton, 318 P.3d 918 (Idaho 2014). · cites it 4× “I.C. §§ 5-201, -224. In this case I.C. § 31-857 is such a limitation for special cases.”
Smith v. State, 473 P.2d 937 (Idaho 1970). · cites it 4× “Appellants do not argue on appeal that they are entitled to sue in their own right and acknowledge that their right is barred by the statute of limitations, I.C. §§ 5-201, 5-219. Hopper v. State of Idaho — No.”
City of McCall v. Buxton, 201 P.3d 629 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 2× “3d 396, 399 (2002); I.C. §§ 5-201 & 5-219(4). The cause of action for professional malpractice accrues “as of the time of the occurrence, act or omission complained of, and the limitation period shall not be extended by reason of any continuing consequences or damages resulting…”
Ada Cnty. v. Browning, 489 P.3d 443 (Idaho 2021). · cites it 4× “” Phillip argues the district court abused its discretion when it denied his request for attorney fees under Idaho Code section 12-117.”
Terra-West, Inc. v. Idaho Mut. Trust, LLC, 247 P.3d 620 (Idaho 2010). · cites it 4× “" Idaho Code § 5-201 (emphasis added) Under the mechanic's lien statute, the lien expires "unless proceedings be commenced in a proper court within [six (6) months after the claim has been filed] to enforce such lien.”
Renner v. Edwards, 475 P.2d 530 (Idaho 1970). · cites it 4× “60 as special and general damages, alleging that the defendant-respondent had misdiagnosed the patient's condition, acted in a field of surgery for which he was unqualified, and performed unnecessary surgery The applicable statutes of limitations are I.C. § 5-201, which, in…”
Conway v. Sonntag, 106 P.3d 470 (Idaho 2005). · cites it 2× “I.C. §§ 5-201 & 5-219 (1998). Except for actions based upon leaving a foreign object in a person’s body or where the fact of damage has been fraudulently and knowingly concealed, the cause of action for professional malpractice accrues “as of the time of the occurrence, act or…”
Nerco Minerals Co. v. Morrison Knudsen Corp., 90 P.3d 894 (Idaho 2004). · cites it 2× “The next step in the Court’s inquiry is to determine the applicable statute of limitations and whether Nerco’s claim is time barred.”
Barry Stimpson v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc., 944 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir. 2019). “If Idaho law applies, Stimpson claims, the statute of limitations on a debt, see Idaho Code §§ 5-201 , 5-216, can be revived by a partial payment on the debt, see Idaho Code § 5-238 ; Modern Mills, 739 P.”
— Idaho Code § 5-201(1) — 1 case
W. Corp. v. Stan L. Vanek, 158 P.3d 313 (Idaho Ct. App. 2006).
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.