Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 54-2094 (2026)
Representation not fiduciary in nature.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Representation not fiduciary in nature.
While this act is intended to abrogate the common law of agency as it applies to regulated real estate transactions, nothing in this act shall prohibit a brokerage from entering into a written agreement with a buyer or seller which creates an agency relationship in which the duties and obligations are greater than those provided in this act. However, unless greater duties are specifically agreed to in writing between the brokerage and a represented client, the duties and obligations owed to a represented client in a regulated real estate transaction are not fiduciary in nature and are not subject to equitable remedies for breach of fiduciary duty.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2005–2012 · leading case: Kuhn v. Coldwell Banker Landmark, Inc., 245 P.3d 992 (Idaho 2010).
Kuhn v. Coldwell Banker Landmark, Inc., 245 P.3d 992 (Idaho 2010). “I.C. § 54-2094. In this case, there was no contractual agreement in the record establishing a fiduciary relationship between the parties.”
Berkshire Investments, LLC v. Taylor, 278 P.3d 943 (Idaho 2012). “Maile’s breach of fiduciary duty as real estate broker was untenable due to I.C. § 54-2094; 1 and (3) the Taylors did not have an attorney-client or broker-client relationship with Mr.”
Taylor v. Maile, 127 P.3d 156 (Idaho 2005). “That statute provides, in pertinent part: “unless greater duties are specifically agreed to in writing between the brokerage and a represented client, the duties and obligations owed to a represented client in a regulated real estate transaction are not fiduciary in nature .”
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.