Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 5-202 (2026)

Actions by state. 

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Actions by state. 

The people of this state will not sue any person for or in respect to any real property or the issues or profits thereof, by reason of the right or title of the people to the same, unless:

1.  Such right or title shall have accrued within ten (10) years before any action or other proceeding for the same is commenced; or,
2.  The people or those from whom they claim, shall have received the rents and profits of such real property, or of some part thereof, within the space of ten (10) years.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2024 · leading case: Ada Cnty. High. Dist. v. Total Success Inv., LLC, 179 P.3d 323 (Idaho 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ada Cnty. High. Dist. v. Total Success Inv., LLC, 179 P.3d 323 (Idaho 2008). · cites it 18× “§ 40-202(3) and presents other issues including whether the highway district’s quiet title action is barred by I.C. § 5-202, whether the acquisition is an unconstitutional taking, and whether the respondent was entitled to a jury trial on the ejectment claim.”
Rutledge v. State, 482 P.2d 515 (Idaho 1971). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 5-202 reads as follows: “5-202. Actions by state.”
IDHW v. Beason, No. 50302 (Idaho Apr. 11, 2024). · cites it 27× “I.C. § 5-202. Alternatively, the Department argues that its claims are governed by Idaho Code section 5-224, the catch-all statute of limitation, which provides a four-year limitation period when an action for relief is not otherwise provided for.”
Idaho Code § 5-202(1): 1 case
Ada Cnty. High. Dist. v. Total Success Inv., LLC, 179 P.3d 323 (Idaho 2008). “§ 40-202(3) and presents other issues including whether the highway district’s quiet title action is barred by I.C. § 5-202, whether the acquisition is an unconstitutional taking, and whether the respondent was entitled to a jury trial on the ejectment claim.”
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.