Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 67-5275 (2026)
Agency record for judicial review.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Agency record for judicial review.
(1) Within forty-two (42) days after the service of the petition, or within further time allowed by the court, the agency shall transmit to the reviewing court the original or a certified copy of the agency record. The agency record shall consist of:
(a) the record compiled under section 67-5225, Idaho Code, when the agency action was a rule;
(b) the record compiled under section 67-5249, Idaho Code, when the agency action was an order; or
(c) any agency documents expressing the agency action when the agency action was neither an order nor a rule.
(2) By stipulation of all parties to the review proceedings, the record may be shortened. A party unreasonably refusing to stipulate to limit the record may be taxed by the court for the additional costs.
(3) The court may require corrections to the record.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1997–2011 · leading case: Petersen v. Franklin Cnty., 938 P.2d 1214 (Idaho 1997).
Petersen v. Franklin Cnty., 938 P.2d 1214 (Idaho 1997). “Section 67-5276 specifies that the court may take additional proof on any “alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency,” I.”
Crown Point Dev., Inc. v. City of Sun Valley, 156 P.3d 573 (Idaho 2007). “By statute, “judicial review of disputed issues of fact must be confined to the agency record for judicial review as defined in this chapter [I.C. § 67-5275(1)], supplemented by additional evidence taken pursuant to section 67-5276, Idaho Code.”
Michael Craig Graves v. State Dept of Transp. (Idaho Ct. App. 2011). “” Finally, Graves noted at the criminal trial that Deputy Cornett testified he left out of the affidavit the fact that Graves had told him his last drink was fifteen minutes before an officer arrived on the scene. By statute, “judicial review of disputed issues of fact must be…”
— Idaho Code § 67-5275(1) — 2 cases
Crown Point Dev., Inc. v. City of Sun Valley, 156 P.3d 573 (Idaho 2007). “By statute, “judicial review of disputed issues of fact must be confined to the agency record for judicial review as defined in this chapter [I.C. § 67-5275(1)], supplemented by additional evidence taken pursuant to section 67-5276, Idaho Code.”
Michael Craig Graves v. State Dept of Transp. (Idaho Ct. App. 2011). “” Finally, Graves noted at the criminal trial that Deputy Cornett testified he left out of the affidavit the fact that Graves had told him his last drink was fifteen minutes before an officer arrived on the scene. By statute, “judicial review of disputed issues of fact must be…”
— Idaho Code § 67-5275(3) — 2 cases
Petersen v. Franklin Cnty., 938 P.2d 1214 (Idaho 1997). “Section 67-5276 specifies that the court may take additional proof on any “alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency,” I.”
Crown Point Dev., Inc. v. City of Sun Valley, 156 P.3d 573 (Idaho 2007). “By statute, “judicial review of disputed issues of fact must be confined to the agency record for judicial review as defined in this chapter [I.C. § 67-5275(1)], supplemented by additional evidence taken pursuant to section 67-5276, Idaho Code.”
— Idaho Code § 67-5275(l)(c) — 1 case
Petersen v. Franklin Cnty., 938 P.2d 1214 (Idaho 1997). “Section 67-5276 specifies that the court may take additional proof on any “alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency,” I.”
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.