Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 72-410 (2026)

Dependents. 

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

Dependents. 

The following persons, and they only, shall be deemed dependents and entitled to income benefits under the provisions of this act:

(1)  A child:
(a)  Under eighteen (18) years of age, or incapable of self-support and unmarried, whether or not actually dependent upon the deceased employee;
(b)  Under twenty-three (23) years of age if a full-time student and as provided for in section 72-412(3), Idaho Code.
(2)  The widow or widower only if living with the deceased or living apart from the deceased for justifiable cause, or actually dependent, wholly or partially, upon the deceased.
(3)  A parent or grandparent only if actually dependent, wholly or partially, upon the deceased.
(4)  A grandchild, brother or sister only if under eighteen (18) years of age, or incapable of self-support, and actually dependent wholly upon the deceased.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1973–1983 · leading case: Graham v. Larry Donohoe Logging, 654 P.2d 1377 (Idaho 1982).
Graham v. Larry Donohoe Logging, 654 P.2d 1377 (Idaho 1982). · cites it 12× “I.C. § 72-410. [1] While the Court may believe itself justified in upholding the Commission's determination that no common-law marriage existed between Carroll and Margaret Graham, the minor claimants Gina and Richard Sanborn are entitled to separate consideration, a point also…”
In Re Chavez, 658 P.2d 950 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 10× “The referee concluded that I.C. § 72-410 defines a parent as dependent "only if actually dependent, wholly or partially, upon the deceased" and that "actually dependent" means "dependent in fact.”
Hayes v. Amalgamated Sugar Co., 658 P.2d 950 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 4× “We approve the construction of I.C. § 72-410(4) expressed by the Industrial Commission — the Workmen’s Compensation law addresses dependency not in terms of “legal” dependency but rather “actual” dependency.”
In Re Haynes, 511 P.2d 309 (Idaho 1973). · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] Now I.C. § 72-410. S.L. 1971, ch. 124. [2] "Q.”
In Re Reichert, 516 P.2d 704 (Idaho 1973). · cites it 4× “I.C. § 72-410. It was accordingly determined that June Reichert was entitled to receive all workmen's compensation benefits.”
Reichert v. Sunshine Mining Co., 516 P.2d 704 (Idaho 1973). · cites it 4× “I.C. § 72-410. It was accordingly determined that June Reichert was entitled to receive all workmen’s compensation benefits.”
Idaho Code § 72-410(1): 1 case
Graham v. Larry Donohoe Logging, 654 P.2d 1377 (Idaho 1982). “I.C. § 72-410. [1] While the Court may believe itself justified in upholding the Commission's determination that no common-law marriage existed between Carroll and Margaret Graham, the minor claimants Gina and Richard Sanborn are entitled to separate consideration, a point also…”
Idaho Code § 72-410(4): 2 cases
In Re Chavez, 658 P.2d 950 (Idaho 1983). “The referee concluded that I.C. § 72-410 defines a parent as dependent "only if actually dependent, wholly or partially, upon the deceased" and that "actually dependent" means "dependent in fact.”
Hayes v. Amalgamated Sugar Co., 658 P.2d 950 (Idaho 1983). “We approve the construction of I.C. § 72-410(4) expressed by the Industrial Commission — the Workmen’s Compensation law addresses dependency not in terms of “legal” dependency but rather “actual” dependency.”
Idaho Code § 72-410(l): 1 case
Graham v. Larry Donohoe Logging, 654 P.2d 1377 (Idaho 1982). “I.C. § 72-410. [1] While the Court may believe itself justified in upholding the Commission's determination that no common-law marriage existed between Carroll and Margaret Graham, the minor claimants Gina and Richard Sanborn are entitled to separate consideration, a point also…”
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.