Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 6-303 (2026)
Unlawful detainer defined.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Unlawful detainer defined.
A tenant of real property, for a term less than life, is guilty of an unlawful detainer:
1. When he continues in possession, in person or by subtenant, of the property, or any part thereof, after the expiration of the term for which it is let to him, without the permission of his landlord, or the successor in estate of his landlord, if any there be; but in case of a tenancy at will, it must first be terminated by notice, as prescribed in the civil code.
2. Where he continues in possession, in person or by subtenant, without permission of his landlord, or the successor in estate of his landlord, if any there be, after default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement under which the property is held, and three (3) days’ notice, in writing, requiring its payment, stating the amount which is due, or possession of the property, shall have been served upon him, and if there be a subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, also upon such subtenant. Such notice shall also notify the tenant that if a court enters judgment against him, then he will have seventy-two (72) hours, if he is a residential tenant, and seven (7) days, or longer if granted by the court, if he is a commercial tenant or a tenant with a tract of land five (5) acres or more, to remove his belongings from the premises before the landlord may remove and dispose of such property pursuant to section 6-316, Idaho Code. Such notice may be served at any time within one (1) year after the rent becomes due. In all cases of tenancy upon agricultural lands, where the tenant has held over and retained possession for more than sixty (60) days after the expiration of his term without any demand of possession or notice to quit by the landlord, or the successor in estate of his landlord, if any there be, he shall be deemed to be holding by permission of the landlord, or the successor in estate of his landlord, if any there be, and shall be entitled to hold under the terms of the lease for another full year, and shall not be guilty of an unlawful detainer during said year, and such holding over for the period aforesaid shall be taken and construed as a consent on the part of a tenant to hold for another year.
3. Where he continues in possession in person, or by subtenants, after a neglect or failure to perform other conditions or covenants of the lease or agreement under which the property is held, including any covenant not to assign or sublet, than the one for payment of rent, and three (3) days’ notice, in writing, requiring the performance of such conditions or covenants, or the possession of the property, shall have been served upon him, and if there be a subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, also upon such subtenant. Within three (3) days after the service of the notice, the tenant, or any subtenant in actual occupation of the premises, or any mortgagee of the term, or other person interested in its continuance, may perform the conditions or covenants of the lease, or pay the stipulated rent, as the case may be, and thereby save the lease from forfeiture: provided, if the covenants and conditions of the lease, violated by the lessee, cannot afterward be performed, then no notice, as last prescribed herein, need be given to said lessee or his subtenant demanding the performance of the violated covenant or conditions of the lease. A tenant may take proceedings similar to those prescribed in this chapter, to obtain possession of premises let to an undertenant, in case of his unlawful detention of the premises underlet to him.
4. A tenant or subtenant, assigning or subletting, or committing waste upon, the demised premises contrary to the covenants of his lease, thereby terminates the lease, and the landlord, or his successor in estate, shall, upon service of three (3) days’ notice to quit upon the person or persons in possession, be entitled to restitution of possession of such demised premises under the provisions of this chapter.
5. If any person is, or has been, engaged in the unlawful delivery, production or use of a controlled substance on the premises of the leased property during the term for which the premises are let to the tenant. For purposes of this chapter, the terms "delivery," "production," and "controlled substance" shall be defined as set forth in section 37-2701, Idaho Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1949–2023 · leading case: Riverside Dev. Co. v. Ritchie, 650 P.2d 657 (Idaho 1982).
Riverside Dev. Co. v. Ritchie, 650 P.2d 657 (Idaho 1982). “*665 In applying Schlegel to the case at bar, it must be observed that the remedy of forfeiture permitted under our unlawful detainer statutes, I.C. §§ 6-303, -316, is merely cumulative to any contractual right of reentry provided for in the lease agreement.”
State v. Johnson, 716 P.2d 1288 (Idaho 1986). “Until written notice is given, however, the non-paying tenant is not viewed by the law as unlawfully detaining the rented premises.”
Maynard v. Nguyen, 274 P.3d 589 (Idaho 2011). “after default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement under which the property is held, and three (3) days' notice, in writing, requiring its payment, stating the amount which is due, or possession of the property, shall have been served upon him .”
Robert Allen Howerton, & Roxanna Howerton v. Jess Gabica & Marjorie Gabica, 708 F.2d 380 (9th Cir. 1983). “Idaho Code § 6-303 (2). The Howertons contend the eviction notice must therefore state the amount of rent due and permit the tenants to pay that amount as an alternative to vacating the premises.”
James Hilliard v. Murphy Land Co., 351 P.3d 1195 (Idaho 2015). “Clark to be served with a Notice to Quit pursuant to Idaho Code §6-303 . Jay P. Clark ignored the Notice to Quit and continued in possession.”
Schiewe v. Farwell, 867 P.2d 920 (Idaho 1993). “The district court ruled: (1) that Schiewe and Farwell were participants in the CRP contract and that Schiewe was an "operator" under the terms of the contract; (2) that the CRP contract did not preclude Farwell from changing tenants or terminating the landlord-tenant…”
Galindo v. Hibbard, 678 P.2d 94 (Idaho Ct. App. 1984). “The landlords rely upon I.C. § 6-303(4), which provides that a tenant terminates his lease upon committing waste.”
Hettinga v. Sybrandy, 886 P.2d 772 (Idaho 1994). “Hettinga neither paid the past due rent on the property nor vacated the property upon proper notification and demand by the Sybrandys.”
Nicholson v. Coeur D'Alene Placer Mining Corp., 392 P.3d 1218 (Idaho 2017). “” I.C. § 6-303(1). There is no contention that the factual allegations in the counterclaim would not state a claim for unlawful detainer.”
Pearson v. Harper, 392 P.2d 687 (Idaho 1964). “This conclusion is further supported by the provisions of I.C. § 6-303, which defines the term “unlawful detainer.”
Boesiger v. Freer, 381 P.2d 802 (Idaho 1963). “y to consider respondent’s contention that respondent, having held over and retained possession of the premises for more than sixty days after the expiration of the term stated in the lease, became entitled to hold under the terms of the lease for another full year retaining the…”
State v. Owen, 141 P.3d 1143 (Idaho Ct. App. 2006). “See I.C. §§ 6-303, 6-310, 6-311, 6-311A, 6-311C; see also State v.”
— Idaho Code § 6-303(1) — 4 cases
Nicholson v. Coeur D'Alene Placer Mining Corp., 392 P.3d 1218 (Idaho 2017). “” I.C. § 6-303(1). There is no contention that the factual allegations in the counterclaim would not state a claim for unlawful detainer.”
Sankey v. Ivey, 535 P.3d 198 (Idaho 2023).
Caldwell Land & Cattle v. Johnson Thermal (Idaho 2019).
Sankey v. Ivey (Idaho 2023).
— Idaho Code § 6-303(2) — 6 cases
Riverside Dev. Co. v. Ritchie, 650 P.2d 657 (Idaho 1982). “*665 In applying Schlegel to the case at bar, it must be observed that the remedy of forfeiture permitted under our unlawful detainer statutes, I.C. §§ 6-303, -316, is merely cumulative to any contractual right of reentry provided for in the lease agreement.”
State v. Johnson, 716 P.2d 1288 (Idaho 1986). “Until written notice is given, however, the non-paying tenant is not viewed by the law as unlawfully detaining the rented premises.”
Maynard v. Nguyen, 274 P.3d 589 (Idaho 2011). “after default in the payment of rent, pursuant to the lease or agreement under which the property is held, and three (3) days' notice, in writing, requiring its payment, stating the amount which is due, or possession of the property, shall have been served upon him .”
Schiewe v. Farwell, 867 P.2d 920 (Idaho 1993). “The district court ruled: (1) that Schiewe and Farwell were participants in the CRP contract and that Schiewe was an "operator" under the terms of the contract; (2) that the CRP contract did not preclude Farwell from changing tenants or terminating the landlord-tenant…”
Schiewe v. Farwell, 867 P.2d 944 (Idaho Ct. App. 1992).
— Idaho Code § 6-303(3) — 1 case
Olson v. Bedke, 555 P.2d 156 (Idaho 1976).
— Idaho Code § 6-303(4) — 1 case
Galindo v. Hibbard, 678 P.2d 94 (Idaho Ct. App. 1984). “The landlords rely upon I.C. § 6-303(4), which provides that a tenant terminates his lease upon committing waste.”
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.