Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 6-1704 (2026)

Statute of limitations.

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Statute of limitations.

(1) Notwithstanding any limitation contained in chapter 2, title 5, Idaho Code, an action under the provisions of this chapter must be commenced within five (5) years from the date that an aggrieved child reaches the age of eighteen (18) years or, after the child reaches the age of eighteen (18) years, within five (5) years of the time the child discovers or reasonably should have discovered the act, abuse or exploitation and its causal relationship to an injury or condition suffered by the child, whichever occurs later.

(2) The child need not establish which act in a series of continuing acts, abuse or exploitation caused the injury complained of, but may compute the date of discovery from the date of discovery of the last act by the same perpetrator which is part of a common scheme or plan.

(3) The knowledge of a custodial parent or guardian shall not be imputed to a child under the age of eighteen (18) years.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1998–2019 · leading case: Doe v. Boy Scouts of Am., 224 P.3d 494 (Idaho 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Doe v. Boy Scouts of Am., 224 P.3d 494 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 12× “” I.C. § 6-1704. Morgan and John Doe I filed their original complaint on July 9, 2007, making the above allegations and seeking recovery from the BSA under Idaho Code section 6-1701 for failure to act on its notice of Schmidt’s activities and remove him from his scouting duties.”

Steed v. Grand Teton Council of the Boy Scouts of Am., Inc., 172 P.3d 1123 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 10× “She argued on appeal that where Idaho Code § 6-1704 provided that the statute of limitations for certain torts committed against children did not expire until five years after the child reached age eighteen, this Court should use that statute by analogy to extend the time period…”

D.A.F. v. Lieteau & Juv. Corr. Nampa, 456 P.3d 193 (Idaho 2019). · cites it 10× “The Juveniles have raised serious issues about a statutory scheme that tolls a statute of limitation (I.C. § 6-1704) because of the injured party’s minority, while still requiring that the party provide notice of his claim within 180 days of reaching majority or six years after…”

Osborn v. Salinas, 958 P.2d 1142 (Idaho 1998). · cites it 12× “[s]exually abused any child____” The statute of limitations for such an action *458 provides that “an action under the provisions of this chapter must be commenced within five (5) years from the date that an aggrieved child reaches the age of eighteen (18) years.”

Glaze v. Deffenbaugh, 172 P.3d 1104 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 2× “Counsel for the daughters argued that they are entitled to the fraudulent concealment exception in I.C. § 5-219(4) because the parties were in a parent-child relationship and because Deffenbaugh concealed his alleged molestation of each daughter from the other.”

Steed v. Grand Teton Council, 172 P.3d 1123 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 10× “She argued on appeal that where Idaho Code § 6-1704 provided that the statute of limitations for certain torts committed against children did not expire until five years after the child reached age eighteen, this Court should use that statute by analogy to extend the time period…”

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.