Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 6-804 (2026)
Common law liabilities preserved.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Common law liabilities preserved.
Nothing in this act affects:
(1) The common law liability of the several joint tortfeasors to have judgment recovered and payment made from them individually by the injured person for the whole injury shall be limited to causes of action listed in section 6-803, Idaho Code. However, the recovery of a judgment by the injured person against one (1) joint tortfeasor does not discharge the other joint tortfeasors.
(2) Any right of indemnity under existing law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1979–1993 · leading case: Tucker v. Union Oil Co. of California, 603 P.2d 156 (Idaho 1979).
Tucker v. Union Oil Co. of California, 603 P.2d 156 (Idaho 1979). “I.C. § 6-804 provides in pertinent part: " Common law liabilities preserved Nothing in this act effects: (1) the common law liability of the several joint tortfeasors to have judgment recovered and payment made from them individually by the injured person for the whole injury.”
Vannoy v. Uniroyal Tire Co., 726 P.2d 648 (Idaho 1986). “" [2] Plaintiffs have settled with those manufacturers. However, a settling tortfeasor is not necessarily released from liability to other joint tortfeasors for actions in contribution or indemnification.”
Adams v. Krueger, 856 P.2d 887 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991). “Idaho Code § 6-804 (2) expressly provides that nothing in the comparative negligence statutory scheme was to affect “[a]ny right of indemnity under existing law.”
Smith v. David S. Shurtleff & Assocs., 858 P.2d 778 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “2d 1168 (1973); I.C. § 6-804. Having reached this conclusion, we need not discuss any of Smith’s contentions regarding the sufficiency of the evidence to prove damages as that issue is now moot.”
Waechter v. Mitchell, 858 P.2d 822 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “Mitchell admits that he failed to notify the vendors of Waechter’s claim within the statutory period and that his negligence is independent from any tortious conduct of the vendors. He maintains, however, that the vendors, whose conduct allegedly caused the injuries giving rise…”
— Idaho Code § 6-804(2) — 2 cases
Adams v. Krueger, 856 P.2d 887 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991). “Idaho Code § 6-804 (2) expressly provides that nothing in the comparative negligence statutory scheme was to affect “[a]ny right of indemnity under existing law.”
Waechter v. Mitchell, 858 P.2d 822 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “Mitchell admits that he failed to notify the vendors of Waechter’s claim within the statutory period and that his negligence is independent from any tortious conduct of the vendors. He maintains, however, that the vendors, whose conduct allegedly caused the injuries giving rise…”
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.