Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 5-310 (2026)
Action for injury to unmarried child.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Action for injury to unmarried child.
The parents may maintain an action for the injury of an unmarried minor child, and for the injury of a minor child who was married at the time of his injury and whose spouse died as a result of the same occurrence and who leaves no issue, and a guardian for the injury of his ward, when such injury is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another, but if either the father or mother be dead or has abandoned his or her family, the other is entitled to sue alone. Such action may be maintained against the person causing the injury, or if such person be employed by another person, who is responsible for his conduct, also against such other person.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1949–2023 · leading case: Volk v. Baldazo, 651 P.2d 11 (Idaho 1982).
Volk v. Baldazo, 651 P.2d 11 (Idaho 1982). “§ 5-311 nor a "child" within the meaning of I.C. § 5-310. I.C. § 5-310 provides: "5-310.”
Black v. Reynolds, 707 P.2d 388 (Idaho 1985). “Interpretation of I.C. § 5-310 The primary issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in determining that under I.”
Nebeker v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 747 P.2d 18 (Idaho 1987). “2d 822, 824 (1973), citing I.C. §§ 5-310 and 5-311. In Harrigfeld , this Court held that a widow and the one child of the deceased and widow "were the proper parties to bring an action for [the deceased's] wrongful death.”
Gavica v. Hanson, 608 P.2d 861 (Idaho 1980). “ When the death of a person, not being a person provided for in section 5-310, Idaho Code, is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another, his heirs or personal representatives may maintain an action for damages against the person causing the death; or if such person be…”
Berg v. Kendall, 212 P.3d 1001 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 5-310 states: The parents may maintain an action for the injury of an unmarried minor child, and for the injury of a minor child who was married at the time of his injury and whose spouse died as a result of the same occurrence and who leaves no issue, and a…”
Santana v. Zilog, Inc., 878 F. Supp. 1373 (D. Idaho 1995). “The Idaho Supreme Court then reviewed Idaho Code § 5-310 which allowed parents to maintain an action for the injury or death of an unmarried minor child, and Section 5-311 which provided that heirs may maintain an action for the death of a person, and determined that neither of…”
Schiess v. Bates, 693 P.2d 440 (Idaho 1984). “Bates moved the district court to dismiss the individual Schiess children as being improper party plaintiffs, being neither “parents” under I.C. § 5-310, nor “heirs” under I.C. § 5-311.”
Castorena v. Gen. Elec., 238 P.3d 209 (Idaho 2010). “§ 5-311 of the Idaho Code published in 1947, and thereafter continuing on until the present time, except for an insignificant 1972 legislative change which deleted the word “minor” and substituted in its place “person provided for in section 5-310, Idaho Code.”
Packard v. Jt. Sch. Dist. No. 171, 661 P.2d 770 (Idaho Ct. App. 1983). “Our analysis begins with the recognition that wrongful death actions are creatures of statute, authorized by I.C. §§ 5-310 and 5 — 311. Section 5-310 provides that parents may bring an action for the death of a child.”
Harrigfeld v. Dist. Court of Seventh Jud. Dist. Ex Rel. Cnty. of Freemont, 511 P.2d 822 (Idaho 1973). “The Harrigfelds also filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the action was being brought and prosecuted by the wife and child of a deceased minor, and that, under the Idaho wrongful death statutes (I.C. §§ 5-310, 311) in effect at the…”
Baxter v. Superior Court, 563 P.2d 871 (Cal. 1977). “( Idaho Code Ann. § 5-310 (supp. 1976) as interpreted in Hayward v.”
Vulk v. Haley, 736 P.2d 1309 (Idaho 1987). “The actions authorized by I.C. § 5-310 [1] and I.C. § 5-311 are not actions arising for the surviving rights of a decedent, Russell v.”
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.