Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 5-229 (2026)

Absence of defendant from state. 

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

Absence of defendant from state. 

If, when the cause of action accrues against a person, he is out of the state, the action may be commenced within the term herein limited, after his return to the state, and if, after the cause of action accrues, he departs from the state, the time of his absence is not part of the time limited for the commencement of the action.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1939–2024 · leading case: Jones v. Watson, 570 P.2d 284 (Idaho 1977).
Jones v. Watson, 570 P.2d 284 (Idaho 1977). · cites it 22× “§ 5-216, a five-year limitation on actions brought to enforce a written contract.”
Stonecipher v. Stonecipher, 963 P.2d 1168 (Idaho 1998). · cites it 12× “§ 5-245; (3) the limitation period had not been tolled, under I.C. § 5-229, during Dwight’s continuing residence in Canada outside the State of Idaho.”
Lipe v. Javelin Tire Co., Inc., 536 P.2d 291 (Idaho 1975). · cites it 13× “§ 5-514, Idaho’s “long-arm statute,” and I.C. § 5-229, which tolls the running of the statute of limitations during a defendant’s absence from the state.”
Tetzlaff v. Brooks, 950 P.2d 1242 (Idaho 1997). · cites it 16× “In opposition to the motion, Tetzlaff contended that the statute of limitations had been tolled by I.C. § 5-229 due to Brooks’s absences from the state.”
Butterfield v. MacKenzie, 966 P.2d 658 (Idaho Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 16× “However, under I.C. § 5-229, a party may be able to toll this statute of limitations.”
Noreen v. Price Dev. Co., 25 P.3d 129 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 12× “She contends that her amended complaint is timely because it dates back to the filing of her original complaint and, alternatively, that Price’s failure to file a certificate of assumed business name with the Secretary of State rendered Price absent from the state for purposes…”
Billings v. Sisters of Mercy of Idaho, 389 P.2d 224 (Idaho 1964). · cites it 4× “§ 5-237 - "actions against directors or stockholders of a corporation to recover a penalty or forfeiture imposed, or to enforce a liability created by law * * must be brought within three years after the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts upon which the penalty or…”
Blankenship v. Myers, 544 P.2d 314 (Idaho 1975). · cites it 4× “§ 5-514, 6 he was never absent from the state within the meaning of I.C. § 5-229, 7 which tolls the running of the statute of limitations during a defendant’s absence from the state, and (2) because the trial court considered the enforcement of a vendor’s lien to be an action in…”
Despain v. Despain, 300 P.2d 500 (Idaho 1956). · cites it 3× “386 , the plaintiff had been awarded separate maintenance and child support payable monthly. Claim on unpaid installments was presented to the administrator of the deceased husband’s estate and re *190 jected.”
Holly Galbraith v. Emily Fairbanks, 2024 WY 36 (Wyo. 2024). · cites it 6× “Idaho Code § 5-229 provides: If, when the cause of action accrues against a person, he is out of the state, the action may be commenced within the term herein limited, after his return to the state, and if, after the cause of action accrues, he departs from the state, the time…”
Landis v. Hodgson, 706 P.2d 1363 (Idaho Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “Landis relies in part upon I.C. § 5-229 which provides that the time a defendant is absent from the state is not counted against the time within which an action can be brought.”
Duff v. Draper, 527 P.2d 1257 (Idaho 1974). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 5-229 provides that any time which the defendant to an action is outside the state is not to be counted as time in which the limitations period is running.”
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.