Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 50-1315 (2026)
Existing plats validated.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Existing plats validated.
None of the provisions of sections 50-1301 through 50-1325, Idaho Code, shall be construed to require replatting in any case where plats have been made and recorded in pursuance of any law heretofore in force; and all plats heretofore filed for record and not subsequently vacated are hereby declared valid, notwithstanding irregularities and omissions in manner of form of acknowledgment or certificate. Provided, however:
(1) When plats have been accepted and recorded for a period of five (5) years and said plats include public streets that were never laid out and constructed to the standards of the appropriate public highway agency, said public street may be classified as public right of way; and
(2) Public rights of way for vehicular traffic included in plats which would not conform to current highway standards of the appropriate public highway agency regarding alignments and access locations which, if developed, would result in an unsafe traffic condition, shall be modified or reconfigured in order to meet current standards before access permits to the public right of way are issued.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1985–2000 · leading case: Worley High. Dist. v. Yacht Club of Coeur D'Alene, Ltd., 775 P.2d 111 (Idaho 1989).
Worley High. Dist. v. Yacht Club of Coeur D'Alene, Ltd., 775 P.2d 111 (Idaho 1989). “Although concluding that the 1904 plat was a "valid statutory plat," with the help of the curative predecessor of present I.C. § 50-1315, the lower court, nevertheless, further concluded that "there has never been a valid statutory dedication of the 60-foot strip to the public…”
Robbins v. Cnty. of Blaine, 996 P.2d 813 (Idaho 2000). “§ 49-2213 (the precursor to I.C. § 50-1315). While we accepted this finding for the purpose of the statutory dedication discussion, we also noted that the district judge’s determination had not been appealed and thus we did not actually address the correctness of the district…”
Williams Lake Lands, Inc. v. LeMoyne Dev., Inc., 702 P.2d 864 (Idaho Ct. App. 1985). “However, because the 1974 replat corrected errors in the original plats for both subdivision 2 and for subdivision 4, we do not consider the effect of I.C. § 50-1315 on the subdivision 2 original plat.”
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.