Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 7-611 (2026)

Contempt consisting in omission. 

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

Contempt consisting in omission. 

When the contempt consists in the omission to perform an act which is yet in the power of the person to perform, he may be imprisoned until he has performed it, and in that case the act must be specified in the warrant of commitment.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1953–2023 · leading case: Camp v. East Fork Ditch Co., Ltd., 55 P.3d 304 (Idaho 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Camp v. East Fork Ditch Co., Ltd., 55 P.3d 304 (Idaho 2002). · cites it 6× “If the contempt consisted of the failure to perform an act that is still within the contemnor’s power to perform, Idaho Code § 7-611 provides that the contemnor can be incarcerated until he performs the act he was previously ordered to perform.”
Marks v. Vehlow, 671 P.2d 473 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 8× “I.C. § 7-611 addresses a permissible civil sanction — incarceration until compliance — for a contempt which consists of an omission.”
Abell v. Abell, 534 P.3d 957 (Idaho 2023). · cites it 6× “Civil contempt sanctions can include incarceration conditioned on purging the contempt, 8 I.C. § 7-611; a daily fine conditioned on the same, Camp, 137 Idaho at 864 , 55 P.”
Amy Slane v. Stephen Adams, 311 P.3d 286 (Idaho 2013). · cites it 2× “It was also not a civil sanction because his motions were dismissed.”
Judy Charney v. Dennis Charney, 356 P.3d 355 (Idaho 2015). · cites it 2× “3d 286, 290 (2013) (quoting Idaho Code section 7-611). Because the allegedly required acts had already been performed, the magistrate court could not have imposed a civil sanction.”
Application of Martin, 279 P.2d 873 (Idaho 1955). · cites it 3× “, which provides: “When the contempt consists in the omission to perform an act which is yet in the power of the person to perform, he may be imprisoned until he has performed it, and in that case the act must be specified in the warrant of commitment.”
Steiner v. Gilbert, 159 P.3d 877 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 3× “2d 473, 480 (1983); I.C. § 7-611. Idaho Code § 1-1603 (4) provides: “Every court has the power .”
Smith v. Smith, 29 P.3d 956 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Nor do we find any abuse of discretion in the district court’s order that Vernon remain incarcerated beyond the five-day term until the amount is paid because this portion of the contempt order was not punitive but was designed to compel compliance with the order for payment of…”
Abell v. Abell (Idaho 2023). · cites it 6× “Civil contempt sanctions can include incarceration conditioned on purging the contempt, 8 I.C. § 7-611; a daily fine conditioned on the same, Camp, 137 Idaho at 864 , 55 P.”
Philip L. Hart v. Idaho State Tax Comm'n, 301 P.3d 627 (Idaho 2012). · cites it 2× “” I.C. § 7-611; Camp, 137 Idaho at 865 , 55 P.”
Kinner v. Steg, 262 P.2d 994 (Idaho 1953). · cites it 2× “Before the learned trial court could commit plaintiff to jail until further order of the court or a period of six months, evidently under Section 7-611, I.C., for failure. to perform in the payment of support for his children, it was jurisdictional that the court have made a…”
Johnson v. Howard, 246 P.3d 983 (Idaho 2011). · cites it 2× “Idaho Code § 7-611 provides, “When the contempt consists in the omission to perform an act which is yet in the power of the person to perform, he may be imprisoned until he has performed it.”
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.