Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 72-228 (2026)

Presumption favoring certain claims. 

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

Presumption favoring certain claims. 

(1) In any claim for compensation, where the employee has been killed, or is physically or mentally unable to testify, and where there is unrebutted prima facie evidence that indicates that the injury arose in the course of employment, it shall be presumed, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, that the injury arose out of the employment and that sufficient notice of the accident causing the injury has been given.

(2)  This section shall not apply to any defense under section 72-208, Idaho Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1976–2023 · leading case: Evans v. Hara's, Inc., 849 P.2d 934 (Idaho 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Evans v. Hara's, Inc., 849 P.2d 934 (Idaho 1993). · cites it 64× “The issues on appeal are whether the Industrial Commission (Commission) correctly applied the presumption contained in I.C. § 72-228 and whether substantial and competent evidence supports the Commission's *936 finding that the workplace did not contribute to claimant-appellant…”
Jordan v. Walmart Assocs., Inc., 539 P.3d 593 (Idaho 2023). · cites it 84× “5 The Commission chided Walmart’s decision to take this case to a hearing before gathering evidence and without properly considering the impact of Idaho Code section 72-228 on the case: The application of the provision of Idaho Code § 72-228 to the facts of this case does not…”
Seamans v. Maaco Auto Painting & Bodyworks, 918 P.2d 1192 (Idaho 1996). · cites it 28× “Maaco argues, however, that because Section 228 came into the statute at the same time that the provision placing the burden of proof on the employer was removed means that burden shifting to an employer applies only in the limited context of I.C. § 72-228, i.e., where a…”
Nelson v. City of Pocatello, 508 P.3d 1234 (Idaho 2022). · cites it 14× “It states: In any claim for compensation, where the employee has been killed, or is physically or mentally unable to testify, and where there is unrebutted prima facie evidence that indicates that the injury arose in the course of employment, it shall be presumed, in the absence…”
Todd L. Hamilton v. Alpha Servs., LLC, 351 P.3d 611 (Idaho 2015). · cites it 6× “The referee relied on Idaho Code section 72-228 to generate a presumption that the accident arose out of Hamilton’s employment.”
Politte v. Idaho Dep't of Transp., 882 P.2d 437 (Idaho 1994). · cites it 18× “We conclude that the employer did not present substantial evidence contrary to the presumption contained in I.C. § 72-228 that the employee’s injury arose out of his employment.”
Kessler Ex Rel. Kessler v. Payette Cnty., 934 P.2d 28 (Idaho 1997). · cites it 7× “Application Of I.C. § 72-228 Lenore Kessler asserts that the Commission erred when it failed to consider the statutory presumption set forth in I.”
Hatley v. Lewiston Grain Growers, Inc., 552 P.2d 482 (Idaho 1976). · cites it 8× “In its conclusions of law, the Commission noted that under I.C. § 72-228 there is a rebuttable presumption that the employee’s death was not occasioned by his intoxication.”
Newman K. Giles v. Eagle Farms, Inc., 339 P.3d 535 (Idaho 2014). · cites it 6× “Throughout the Court’s analysis, it stressed that its reasoning relied on the presence of the statutory presumption — “[i]n light of the presumption imposed by I.C. § 72-228 ...“particularly in view of the presumption contained in the statute,” and “not sufficiently high to…”
Lines v. Idaho Forest Indus., 872 P.2d 725 (Idaho 1994). · cites it 2× “The trial court granted summary judgment denying Lines’s claim on the ground that IFI *464 was not a third party referred to in I.C. § 72-228. After Lines moved for reconsideration, SIF was granted leave to intervene.”
— Idaho Code § 72-228(1) — 1 case
Todd L. Hamilton v. Alpha Servs., LLC, 351 P.3d 611 (Idaho 2015). “The referee relied on Idaho Code section 72-228 to generate a presumption that the accident arose out of Hamilton’s employment.”
— Idaho Code § 72-228(2) — 1 case
Newman K. Giles v. Eagle Farms, Inc., 339 P.3d 535 (Idaho 2014). “Throughout the Court’s analysis, it stressed that its reasoning relied on the presence of the statutory presumption — “[i]n light of the presumption imposed by I.C. § 72-228 ...“particularly in view of the presumption contained in the statute,” and “not sufficiently high to…”
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.