Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 50-1727 (2026)

Publication and conclusiveness of proceedings.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Publication and conclusiveness of proceedings.

The council may provide for the publication of any ordinance, resolution or other proceeding adopted by it pursuant to this code in the official newspaper of the municipality. For a period of thirty (30) days after such publication any person in interest shall have the right to contest the legality of such ordinance, resolution or proceeding or any bonds which may be authorized thereby. No contest or proceeding to question the validity or legality of any ordinance, resolution or proceeding, or any bonds which may be authorized thereby, passed or adopted under the provisions of this code shall be brought in any court by any person for any cause whatsoever, after the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date when the ordinance, resolution or proceeding was published, and after such time the validity, legality and regularity of such ordinance, resolution or proceeding or any bonds authorized thereby shall be conclusively presumed. If the question of validity of any bonds issued pursuant to this code is not raised within thirty (30) days from the date of publication of the ordinance, resolution or proceeding issuing said bonds and fixing their terms, the authority to issue the bonds, the legality thereof and of the assessments necessary to pay the same shall be conclusively presumed and no court shall thereafter have authority to inquire into such matters.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1983–2017 · leading case: Simmons v. City of Moscow, 720 P.2d 197 (Idaho 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Simmons v. City of Moscow, 720 P.2d 197 (Idaho 1986). · cites it 4× “The trial court correctly concluded that I.C. § 50-1727 [1] applied to prevent the property owners from contesting the validity, legality, and regularity of the creation ordinance.”

Jeanette Hoffman v. Bd of Local Improvement Dist No. 1101, 415 P.3d 332 (Idaho 2017). · cites it 2× “However, Appellants offered no evidence or argument demonstrating that such challenges were not time-barred under I.C. § 50-1727, which requires legal challenges to the formation of an LID to be brought within 30 days after publication of the ordinance.”

Mangum v. City of Orofino, 669 P.2d 196 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 6× “§ 50-1709 have been held by this Court to be constitutional, and that by failing to commence the action within thirty days after publication of the city ordinance as required by I.C. § 50-1727, Property Owners were barred from contesting the legality of the ordinance.”

Jeanette Hoffman v. Bd of Local Improvement Dist No. 1101 (Idaho 2016). · cites it 2× “However, Appellants offered no evidence or argument demonstrating that such challenges were not time-barred under I.C. § 50-1727, which requires legal challenges to the formation of an LID to be brought within 10 30 days after publication of the ordinance.”

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.