Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 5-203 (2026)
Action to recover realty.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Action to recover realty.
No action for the recovery of real property, or for the recovery of the possession thereof, can be maintained, unless it appears that the plaintiff, his ancestor, predecessor or grantor, was seized or possessed of the property in question within twenty (20) years before the commencement of the action; and this section includes possessory rights to lands and mining claims.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 68
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case: Merrill v. Gibson, 87 P.3d 949 (Idaho 2004).
Merrill v. Gibson, 87 P.3d 949 (Idaho 2004). “The trial court correctly ruled on the Merrills’ quiet title claim: Gibson argues the Merrills’ did not file the quiet title action within the time limits allowed by I.C. §§ 5-203 and 5-211. Section 5-203 provides that “no action for the recovery of real property .”
Hodgins v. Sales, 76 P.3d 969 (Idaho 2003). “See I.C. § 5-203; Baxter v. Craney, 135 Idaho 166, 173 , 16 P.”
Anderson v. Larsen, 34 P.3d 1085 (Idaho 2001). “The crux of the district court's decision was that the Andersons had failed to show a continuous and uninterrupted use of the Larsen property for the five-year period required by I.C. § 5-203 to establish prescription. The district court also awarded attorney fees and costs to…”
Baxter v. Craney, 16 P.3d 263 (Idaho 2000). “See I.C. § 5-203; West v. Smith, 95 Idaho 550 , 511 P.”
Curtis v. Firth, 850 P.2d 749 (Idaho 1993). “) If such "continuous, uninterrupted use" occurs, the applicable statute of limitations, I.C. § 5-203, "gives an owner five years to take the necessary and appropriate legal action to have an unauthorized use of his property stopped.”
Capstar Radio Operating Co. v. Lawrence, 283 P.3d 728 (Idaho 2012). “In explaining its reasoning, the district court stated: Lawrences fail to realize that Funk’s use of his property and the use he made of the Lawrence property from 1975 to present is not relevant. The uncontradicted evidence is that Funk used the property consistently for the…”
Jerry Machado v. Charles L. Ryan, 280 P.3d 715 (Idaho 2012). “The statutory period is defined by I.C. § 5-203. Id. In 2006, the Idaho Legislature amended I.”
Gibbens v. Weisshaupt, 570 P.2d 870 (Idaho 1977). “I.C. § 5-203. The general rule is that proof of open, notorious, continuous, uninterrupted use of the claimed right for the prescriptive period, without evidence as to how the use began raises the presumption that the use was adverse and under claim of right.”
John E. Fuquay v. Susie Low, 397 P.3d 1132 (Idaho 2017). “2 Under Idaho Code section 5-203, the statutory period is five years for prescriptive easement claims established prior to the amendment of the statute in 2006, or twenty years if established after the amendment.”
Akers v. D.L. White Constr., Inc., 127 P.3d 196 (Idaho 2005). “I.C. § 5-203; Weaver, 134 Idaho at 698 , 8 P.”
Hughes v. George B. Fisher, LLC, 129 P.3d 1223 (Idaho 2006). “3d at 973 ; see I.C. § 5-203. A prescriptive right cannot be granted if the use of the servient tenement was by permission of its owner, because the use, by definition, was not adverse to the rights of the owner.”
Stecklein v. Montgomery, 570 P.2d 1359 (Idaho 1977). “I.C. § 5-203. Montgomery testified as follows: "Q.”
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.