Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 6-802 (2026)
Verdict giving percentage of negligence or comparative responsibility attributable to each party.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Verdict giving percentage of negligence or comparative responsibility attributable to each party.
The court may, and when requested by any party shall, direct the jury to find separate special verdicts determining the amount of damages and the percentage of negligence or comparative responsibility attributable to each party; and the court shall then reduce the amount of such damages in proportion to the amount of negligence or comparative responsibility attributable to the person recovering. Nothing contained herein shall create any new legal theory, cause of action, or legal defense.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Blome v. TRUKSA, 946 P.2d 631 (Idaho 1997).
Blome v. TRUKSA, 946 P.2d 631 (Idaho 1997). “” I.C. § 6-802 (1971). 1 Prior to commencement of the Marchand trial, both Truksa and Mercy Medical Center submitted special verdict forms which asked the jury to apportion fault among the Marchand defendants.”
Odenwalt v. Zaring, 624 P.2d 383 (Idaho 1980). “186 (See Appendix "A") and thereafter codified as I.C. §§ 6-802 (special verdicts), 6-803 (contribution among tortfeasors), 6-804 (retaining joint and several liability), and 6-805-06 (release of tortfeasor).”
Vannoy v. Uniroyal Tire Co., 726 P.2d 648 (Idaho 1986). “2212a [the Texas comparative negligence statute, similar to I.C. § 6-802] does not apply, and there is no other comprehensive system for loss allocation under existing law.”
Van Brunt v. Stoddard, 39 P.3d 621 (Idaho 2001). “In Idaho, I.C. § 6-802 provides that the court, at the request of any party, may direct the jury to find separate special verdicts determining the amount of damages and the percentage of negligence or comparative responsibility attributable to each party.”
Hill v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins., 249 P.3d 812 (Idaho 2011). “See I.C. § 6-802 (permitting the court to apportion damages among defendants).”
Jones v. Crawforth, 205 P.3d 660 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 6-802 states: The court may, and when requested by any party shall, direct the jury to find separate special verdicts determining the amount of damages and the percentage of negligence or comparative responsibility attributable to each party; and the court shall…”
Thompson v. Hagan, 523 P.2d 1365 (Idaho 1974). “" "[I.C. § 6-802:]-The court may, and when requested by any party shall, direct the jury to find separate special verdicts determining the amount of damages and the percentage of negligence attributable to each party; and the court shall then reduce the amount of such damages in…”
Campion v. Simpson, 659 P.2d 766 (Idaho 1983). “I.C. § 6-802. [1] The court did not find the specific percentage of causation attributable to Simpson, but again neither party requested the court to do so.”
Pocatello Indus. Park Co. v. Steel West, Inc., 621 P.2d 399 (Idaho 1980). “Pocatello Industrial contends that the reference to the term “party” in our comparative negligence statute, I.C. § 6-802, implies that only parties may be included in the special verdict: “6-802.”
Sullivan v. Scoular Grain Co. of Utah, 853 P.2d 877 (Utah 1993). “2d 365, 373 (1985) (same); Idaho, Idaho Code § 6-802 (1990), Pocatello Indus.”
Highland Enter., Inc. v. Barker, 986 P.2d 996 (Idaho 1999). “See I.C. § 6-802 (1998). Drawing all inferences in favor of Highland that the appellants acted in concert to cause the damage Highland suffered, substantial evidence existed to support the separate damage awards against the appellants.”
Saint Alphonsus Diversified Care, Inc. v. MRI Assocs., LLP, 334 P.3d 780 (Idaho 2014). “We held that Idaho Code section 6-802 authorizes apportionment; that Idaho Code section 6-803 “provides for contribution among ‘joint’ tortfeasors which ‘means one (1) of two (2) or more persons jointly or severally liable in tort’ ”; and that “[tjhese statutes authorize…”
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.