Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 7-718 (2026)

Costs. 

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

Costs. 

Costs may be allowed or not, and, if allowed, may be apportioned between the parties on the same or adverse sides in the discretion of the court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1983–2015 · leading case: Dept of Transp. v. HJ Grathol, 343 P.3d 480 (Idaho 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dept of Transp. v. HJ Grathol, 343 P.3d 480 (Idaho 2015). · cites it 24× “The court determined ITD was the prevailing party and followed section 7-718 to award costs with an analysis of the Acarrequi factors. The district court did not consider whether Grathol acted with a reasonable basis in law or fact.”
State Ex Rel. Ohman v. Ivan H. Talbot Fam. Trust, 820 P.2d 695 (Idaho 1991). · cites it 4× “) I.C. § 7-718, dealing with eminent domain, provides: `Costs may be allowed or not, and, if allowed, may be apportioned between the parties on the same or adverse sides in the discretion of the court.”
Telford Lands LLC v. Cain, 303 P.3d 1237 (Idaho 2013). · cites it 3× “Based upon the record, we must vacate the dismissal of the counterclaim and remand this case for further proceedings regarding that issue.”
State Ex Rel. Winder v. Canyon Vista Fam. Ltd. P'ship, 228 P.3d 985 (Idaho 2010). · cites it 4× “The only arguments that the State has properly raised on appeal relate to whether the district court erred in admitting the order of condemnation and whether the district court erred in awarding Canyon attorney fees.”
Ada Cnty. High. Dist. ex rel. Fairbanks v. Acarrequi, 673 P.2d 1067 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 2× “) I.C. § 7-718, dealing with eminent domain, provides: “Costs may be allowed or not, and, if allowed, may be apportioned between the parties on the same or adverse sides in the discretion of the court.”
State of Idaho v. Canyon Vista Fam. Ltd. P'ship & Lazy J. Ranch, Inc. (Idaho 2010). · cites it 4× “The only arguments that the State has properly raised on appeal relate to whether the district court erred in admitting the order of condemnation and whether the district court erred in awarding Canyon attorney fees.”
Ada Cnty. High. Dist. v. Acarrequi, 673 P.2d 1067 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 2× “) I.C. § 7-718, dealing with eminent domain, provides: "Costs may be allowed or not, and, if allowed, may be apportioned between the parties on the same or adverse sides in the discretion of the court.”
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.