Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 6-1401 (2026)
Scope.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Scope.
The previous existing applicable law of this state on product liability is modified only to the extent set forth in this act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Vannoy v. Uniroyal Tire Co., 726 P.2d 648 (Idaho 1986).
Vannoy v. Uniroyal Tire Co., 726 P.2d 648 (Idaho 1986). “" I.C. § 6-1401. Nothing in the products liability act modifies the approved and required practice of comparing the responsibility of all alleged tortfeasors on a special verdict form, whether or not those alleged tortfeasors are parties to the action.”
Peterson v. Idaho First Nat'l Bank, 791 P.2d 1303 (Idaho 1990). “We next turn to the question of whether I.C. § 6-1401 et seq., the Idaho Product Liability Reform Act (IPLRA), has any bearing on this issue.”
Watson v. Navistar Int'l Transp. Corp., 827 P.2d 656 (Idaho 1992). “It is clear that the Idaho Product Liability Reform Act, I.C. § 6-1401 through § 6-1409, allows the defense of assumption of the risk and product misuse as a component of comparative negligence.”
Salinas v. Vierstra, 695 P.2d 369 (Idaho 1985). “I.C. § 6-1401 through -1409. Section 6-1404 of the Act states that a person's recovery may be reduced in the proportion to which the plaintiff was responsible for the harm suffered.”
Myers v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Prods., Inc., 757 P.2d 695 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). “4 IV Finally we examine the Myers’ contention that the trial court erred by rejecting jury instructions derived from two statutes: the Idaho Products Liability Reform Act, I.C. §§ 6-1401, -1410, and the Idaho Consumer Protection Act, I.”
Tuttle v. Sudenga Indus., Inc., 868 P.2d 473 (Idaho 1994). “We first find that the analysis conducted by the district court and its summary disposition of this case was incorrect in light of our cases which have decided that the Idaho Products Liability Act, I.”
Adams v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 596 F. Supp. 1407 (D. Idaho 1984). “Section 6-1403(3) of the Idaho Products Liability Reform Act 1 Idaho Code §§ 6-1401 et *1409 seq., provides that no products liability claim “may be brought more than two (2) years from the time that the cause of action accrues as defined in § 5-219, Idaho Code.”
Oats v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A., 879 P.2d 1095 (Idaho 1994). “” I.C. § 6-1401. Thus, we will examine whether, under previous existing law, a breach of *170 warranty action to recover for personal injuries must exist under the UCC’s warranty provisions, if at all, or whether such an action can sound in tort; in which case it would more…”
Jenkins v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 643 F. Supp. 17 (D. Idaho 1985). “Although the Products Liability Act did not replace wholesale Idaho’s existing products liability law,- it did create a systematic statutory scheme covering all products liability actions in the state of Idaho.”
Duff v. Bonner Bldg. Supply, Inc., 649 P.2d 391 (Idaho Ct. App. 1982). “The case arose prior to, and is not governed by, the provisions of the Idaho Product Liability Reform Act, I.C. § 6-1401 et seq.”
Galbraith v. Vangas, Inc., 655 P.2d 119 (Idaho Ct. App. 1982). “This action was filed prior to, and therefore is not governed by, the Idaho Product Liability Reform Act, I.C. §§ 6-1401 et seq. See 1980 Idaho Session Laws ch.”
Doe v. Cutter Biological, a Div. of Miles, Inc., 852 F. Supp. 909 (D. Idaho 1994). “Moreover, in 1980 the Idaho legislature passed the Product Liability Reform Act, Idaho Code §§ 6-1401 , et seq. (1990). In its definition of a "product,” the legislature expressly excluded "human blood and its components.”
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.