Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 55-308 (2026)
Ownership of street by abutter.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Ownership of street by abutter.
An owner of land bounded by a road or street is presumed to own to the center of the way, but the contrary may be shown.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1951–2019 · leading case: Rayl v. Shull Enter., Inc., 700 P.2d 567 (Idaho 1985).
Rayl v. Shull Enter., Inc., 700 P.2d 567 (Idaho 1985). “In Idaho, tenants are generally allowed to remove fixtures from leased premises during their term if the removal can be effected without injury to property, so long as the fixture has not become an integral part of the premises.”
Pearson v. Harper, 392 P.2d 687 (Idaho 1964). “could be effected without injury to plaintiffs premises, or unless the thing, by the manner in which it was affixed, had become an integral part of the premises; and that upon the termination of the lease agreement plaintiffs became the owners of all trade fixtures of defendants…”
Steel Farms, Inc. v. Croft & Reed, Inc., 297 P.3d 222 (Idaho 2012). “” I.C. § 55-308. (1)n determining whether a particular article has become a trade fixture, three general tests are to be applied: (1) annexation to the realty, either actual or constructive; (2) adaptation or application to the use or purpose to which that part of the realty to…”
Lewiston Pre-Mix Concrete, Inc. v. Rohde, 718 P.2d 551 (Idaho Ct. App. 1985). “2d 687 (1964) (the possession of a tenant, holding over after expiration of his lease, “was no more than a continuance of the original term,” and entitled tenant to remove certain trade fixtures under I.C. § 55-308). Here, Lewiston was prevented from removing the improvements,…”
Fid. Trust Co. v. State, 237 P.2d 1058 (Idaho 1951). “In the absence of the lease so providing, Section 55-308, I.C., 1 will govern, as it is axiomatic that extant law is written into and -made a part of every written contract.”
P.N. Cedar, Inc. v. D & G Shake Co., 716 P.2d 1333 (Idaho Ct. App. 1986). “Idaho Code § 55-308 provides: A tenant may remove from the demised premises, any time during the continuance of his term, anything affixed thereto for the purposes of trade, manufacture, ornament or domestic use, if the removal can be effected without injury to the premises,…”
Caldwell Land & Cattle v. Johnson Thermal (Idaho 2019). “Idaho has a statute for these situations: A tenant may remove from the demised premises, any time during the continuance of his term, anything affixed thereto for the purposes of trade, manufacture, ornament or domestic use, if the removal can be effected without 25 injury to…”
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.