Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 67-9229 (2026)

application of administrative procedure act. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

application of administrative procedure act. 

(1) All rules of the division of purchasing shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of chapter 52, title 67, Idaho Code. Only appeals conducted as contested cases pursuant to section 67-9232(3)(a)(iii), Idaho Code, shall be subject to the judicial review provisions of chapter 52, title 67, Idaho Code. This section shall not impair any contract right or contract remedy that may exist between the state and a properly licensed contractor or vendor.

(2)  A determinations officer appointed by the director pursuant to the provisions of this chapter may subpoena witnesses and evidence and administer oaths.
(3)  In the event that a determinations officer is appointed pursuant to the provisions of section 67-9232, Idaho Code, any vendor who has submitted a bid in the process under review shall, notwithstanding any other disability, have standing to intervene in the proceeding as a party, and such intervenor may participate in any challenge or appeal provided for in this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Carelon Behavioral Health, Inc. v. State (Idaho 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Carelon Behavioral Health, Inc. v. State (Idaho 2025). · cites it 8× “The district court first concluded it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Carelon’s requests for declaratory judgment on counts one through four because these claims essentially required the court to perform a judicial review of the Director’s decision, which is expressly…”
Idaho Code § 67-9229(1): 1 case
Carelon Behavioral Health, Inc. v. State (Idaho 2025). “The district court first concluded it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Carelon’s requests for declaratory judgment on counts one through four because these claims essentially required the court to perform a judicial review of the Director’s decision, which is expressly…”
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.