Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 72-601 (2026)

Record of injuries — Necessity — Availability — Failure to keep. 

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

Record of injuries — Necessity — Availability — Failure to keep. 

(1) Employers’ records of injuries. An employer shall keep a record of each injury and occupational disease fatal or otherwise, arising out of and in the course of employment, reported to the employer or of which he otherwise may have knowledge. Such record shall include a description of the injury or disease and the manner in which the same occurred, a statement of the time during which an employee was unable to work because of the affliction and such other information as the commission may require to be kept.

(2)  Failure to keep records a misdemeanor. Any employer who wilfully fails or refuses to keep records of injuries and occupational diseases as required by this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1951–2025 · leading case: Painter v. Potlatch Corp., 63 P.3d 435 (Idaho 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Painter v. Potlatch Corp., 63 P.3d 435 (Idaho 2003). · cites it 7× “” Because the record does not reveal an adverse ruling regarding whether the incidents Painter alleged would, if proven, constitute accidents, this Court will not consider whether the Commission applied the correct defini: tion of accident. 2. This Court will not address whether…”
Huerta v. Sch. Dist. No. 431, 773 P.2d 1130 (Idaho 1989). · cites it 12× “I.C. § 72-601. As stated in Duggan v. Potlatch Forests, Inc.”
Hite v. Kulhenak Bldg. Contractor, 524 P.2d 531 (Idaho 1974). · cites it 20× “I.C. § 72-601. As stated in Duggan v. Potlatch Forests, Inc.”
Kinney v. Tupperware Co., 792 P.2d 330 (Idaho 1990). · cites it 2× “Appellants would limit the use of these “learned treatises” relied on by their expert to the proposition urged by their expert.”
Rivera v. Johnston, 225 P.2d 858 (Idaho 1951). · cites it 4× “* * *" Section 72-601, I.C. The Workmen's Compensation Law must be liberally construed in favor of dependents.”
Duggan v. Potlatch Forests, Inc., 441 P.2d 172 (Idaho 1968). · cites it 4× “be heard, was a denial of due process under United States Constitution, amendment 5, and amendment 14, § 1, and Idaho Constitution, art. 1, § 13.”
Petry v. Spaulding Drywall, 788 P.2d 197 (Idaho 1990). · cites it 2× “Idaho Code § 72-601 (1) in turn, requires the employer to file a report to the Industrial Commission of any injury which requires treatment by a physician or which results in absence from work of one day or more.”
Monroe v. Chapman, 668 P.2d 1000 (Idaho 1983). · cites it 2× “Today it ignores the Constitution which created it, and, ironically does so on the supposed hypothesis that “this inaction [on the part of the Industrial Commission] does not constitute a denial of due process Where the majority in a single breath advises the Industrial…”
MATTER OF LOCKARD v. St. Maries Lumber Co., 274 P.2d 995 (Idaho 1954). · cites it 2× “The Surety Company, finding itself *501 liable or to become liable for the debts •of its principals, seeks to subject the proceeds of the contracts out of which the contract of suretyship arose to the payment of the debts of the principal, •or seeks subrogation to the rights of…”
In Re Markham's, Inc., 316 P.2d 553 (Idaho 1957). “The board is clearly authorized to rehear the entire controversy, to make its own findings of fact and draw its own conclusions, and is not limited to questions of law.”
Coronado v. City of Boise (Idaho 2025). · cites it 6× “; compare I.C. § 72-601 (1950) (“Process and procedure under this act shall be as summary and simple as reasonably may be and as far as possible in accordance with the rules of equity.”
Coronado v. City of Boise (Idaho 2025). · cites it 6× “; compare I.C. § 72-601 (1950) (“Process and procedure under this act shall be as summary and simple as reasonably may be and as far as possible in accordance with the rules of equity.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.