Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 6-2103 (2026)
Definitions.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Definitions.
As used in this chapter:
(1) "Adverse action" means to discharge, threaten or otherwise discriminate against an employee in any manner that affects the employee’s employment, including compensation, terms, conditions, location, rights, immunities, promotions or privileges.
(2) "Communicate" means a verbal or written report.
(3) "Employee" means a person who performs a service for wages or other remuneration.
(4) (a) "Employer" means the state of Idaho, or any political subdivision or governmental entity eligible to participate in the public employees retirement system, chapter 13, title 59, Idaho Code;
(b) "Employer" includes an agent of an employer.
(5) "Public body" means any of the following:
(a) A state officer, employee, agency, department, division, bureau, board, commission, council, authority, educational institution or any other body in the executive branch of state government;
(b) An agency, board, commission, council, institution member or employee of the legislative branch of state government;
(c) A county, city, town, regional governing body, council, school district, special district, municipal corporation, other political subdivision, board, department, commission, council, agency or any member or employee of them;
(d) Any other body that is created by state or local authority, or any member or employee of that body;
(e) A law enforcement agency or any member or employee of a law enforcement agency; and
(f) The judiciary and any member or employee of the judiciary.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: Curlee v. Kootenai Cnty. Fire & Rescue, 224 P.3d 458 (Idaho 2008).
Curlee v. Kootenai Cnty. Fire & Rescue, 224 P.3d 458 (Idaho 2008). “As we concluded in Part 111(A), supra, Curlee has met her summary judgment burden of demonstrating that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether her discharge was causally related to her maintaining the log of her coworkers’ conduct.”
Berrett v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist., 454 P.3d 555 (Idaho 2019). “” See I.C. § 6-2103. To make out a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge under the Whistleblower Act, Ryan Berrett must show: (1) he was an employee who engaged in or intended to engage in protected activity; (2) his employer took adverse action against him; and (3) a causal…”
Eller v. Idaho State Police, 443 P.3d 161 (Idaho 2019). “" I.C. § 6-2103(1). In determining whether Eller engaged in protected activity under the Whistleblower Act, we will address Eller's actions in (1) testifying at the Sloan investigation preliminary hearing, and (2) objecting to the new ISP draft peer review policy.”
Richard T. Wright v. Ada Cnty., 376 P.3d 58 (Idaho 2016). “I.C. § 6-2103(1). To present a prim a facie case for retaliatory discharge under the Whistleblower Act, the plaintiff must show: (1) he was an ‘employee’ who engaged or intended to engage in protected activity; (2) his ‘employer’ took adverse action against him; and (3) the…”
Sharon R. Hammer v. City of Sun Valley, 414 P.3d 1178 (Idaho 2016). “The Plaintiff contends that the district court erred in holding that the IPPEA did not provide for individual liability. In statements before a legislative committee, the author of the IPPEA stated that the language in the bill was derived from the federal law and several state…”
Jeffry Black v. Idaho State Police, 314 P.3d 625 (Idaho 2013). “Pursuant to the refusal clause, “[a]n employer may not take adverse action against an employee because the employee has objected to or refused to carry out a directive that the employee reasonably believes violates a law or a rule or regulation adopted under the authority of the…”
Eller v. Idaho State Police (Idaho 2019). “” I.C. § 6-2103(1). In determining whether Eller engaged in protected activity under the Whistleblower Act, we will address Eller’s actions in (1) testifying at the Sloan investigation preliminary hearing, and (2) objecting to the new ISP draft peer review policy.”
Brainard (D. Idaho 2026). “” Idaho Code § 6-2103 (1). Constructive discharge is considered an adverse action under the IPPEA, subject to the same objective standard as federal claims.”
— Idaho Code § 6-2103(1) — 4 cases
Eller v. Idaho State Police, 443 P.3d 161 (Idaho 2019). “" I.C. § 6-2103(1). In determining whether Eller engaged in protected activity under the Whistleblower Act, we will address Eller's actions in (1) testifying at the Sloan investigation preliminary hearing, and (2) objecting to the new ISP draft peer review policy.”
Richard T. Wright v. Ada Cnty., 376 P.3d 58 (Idaho 2016). “I.C. § 6-2103(1). To present a prim a facie case for retaliatory discharge under the Whistleblower Act, the plaintiff must show: (1) he was an ‘employee’ who engaged or intended to engage in protected activity; (2) his ‘employer’ took adverse action against him; and (3) the…”
Sharon R. Hammer v. City of Sun Valley, 414 P.3d 1178 (Idaho 2016). “The Plaintiff contends that the district court erred in holding that the IPPEA did not provide for individual liability. In statements before a legislative committee, the author of the IPPEA stated that the language in the bill was derived from the federal law and several state…”
Eller v. Idaho State Police (Idaho 2019). “” I.C. § 6-2103(1). In determining whether Eller engaged in protected activity under the Whistleblower Act, we will address Eller’s actions in (1) testifying at the Sloan investigation preliminary hearing, and (2) objecting to the new ISP draft peer review policy.”
— Idaho Code § 6-2103(2) — 2 cases
Curlee v. Kootenai Cnty. Fire & Rescue, 224 P.3d 458 (Idaho 2008). “As we concluded in Part 111(A), supra, Curlee has met her summary judgment burden of demonstrating that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether her discharge was causally related to her maintaining the log of her coworkers’ conduct.”
Eller v. Idaho State Police, 443 P.3d 161 (Idaho 2019). “" I.C. § 6-2103(1). In determining whether Eller engaged in protected activity under the Whistleblower Act, we will address Eller's actions in (1) testifying at the Sloan investigation preliminary hearing, and (2) objecting to the new ISP draft peer review policy.”
— Idaho Code § 6-2103(4) — 1 case
Sharon R. Hammer v. City of Sun Valley, 414 P.3d 1178 (Idaho 2016). “The Plaintiff contends that the district court erred in holding that the IPPEA did not provide for individual liability. In statements before a legislative committee, the author of the IPPEA stated that the language in the bill was derived from the federal law and several state…”
— Idaho Code § 6-2103(4)(b) — 1 case
Sharon R. Hammer v. City of Sun Valley, 414 P.3d 1178 (Idaho 2016). “The Plaintiff contends that the district court erred in holding that the IPPEA did not provide for individual liability. In statements before a legislative committee, the author of the IPPEA stated that the language in the bill was derived from the federal law and several state…”
— Idaho Code § 6-2103(5) — 1 case
Sharon R. Hammer v. City of Sun Valley, 414 P.3d 1178 (Idaho 2016). “The Plaintiff contends that the district court erred in holding that the IPPEA did not provide for individual liability. In statements before a legislative committee, the author of the IPPEA stated that the language in the bill was derived from the federal law and several state…”
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.