Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 72-707 (2026)

Commission has jurisdiction of disputes. 

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

Commission has jurisdiction of disputes. 

All questions arising under this law, if not settled by agreement or stipulation of the interested parties with the approval of the commission, except as otherwise herein provided, shall be determined by the commission.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Indus. Comm'n v. Quick Transp., Inc., 999 P.2d 895 (Idaho 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Indus. Comm'n v. Quick Transp., Inc., 999 P.2d 895 (Idaho 2000). · cites it 26× “DISCUSSION Because the magistrate judge granted the motion for summary judgment based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, we must decide whether, under I.C. § 72-707 and our prior decisions, the Commission had exclusive jurisdiction over the question of whether a violation…”
Williams v. Blue Cross of Idaho, 260 P.3d 1186 (Idaho 2011). · cites it 12× “According to I.C. § 72-707, “[a]ll questions arising under [the workers’ compensation laws of this state], if not settled by agreement or stipulation of the interested parties with the approval of the commission, except as otherwise herein provided, shall be determined by the…”
Smith v. O/P Transp., Inc., 814 P.2d 23 (Idaho 1991). · cites it 32× “All questions arising under this law, if not settled by agreement or stipulation of the interested parties with the approval of the commission, except as otherwise herein provided, shall be determined by the commission.”
Brooks v. Stand. Fire Ins., 793 P.2d 1238 (Idaho 1990). · cites it 8× “Idaho Code § 72-707 states: All questions arising under this law, if not settled by agreement or stipulation of the interested parties with the approval of the Commission, except as otherwise herein provided, shall be determined by the Commission.”
Arreola v. Scentsy, Inc., 531 P.3d 1148 (Idaho 2023). · cites it 10× “I.C. § 72-707 (emphasis added). Upon application of any party to the proceeding, or when ordered by the commission or a member thereof or a hearing officer, referee or examiner, and when issues in a case cannot be resolved by pre-hearing conferences or otherwise, a hearing shall…”
Walker v. Hensley Trucking, 691 P.2d 1187 (Idaho 1984). · cites it 4× “" On appeal from orders of the Industrial Commission, this Court is limited to a review of questions of law. Idaho Const. art.”
Heese v. A & T Trucking, 635 P.2d 962 (Idaho 1981). · cites it 4× “I.C. § 72-707 provides: “All questions arising under this law, if not settled by agreement or stipulation of the interested parties with the approval of the Commission, except as otherwise herein provided, shall be determined by the Commission.”
Kolar v. Cassia Cnty. Idaho, 127 P.3d 962 (Idaho 2005). · cites it 2× “For this theory he cites I.C. § 72-707, which provides: “All questions arising under this law, if not settled by agreement or stipulation of the interested parties with the approval of the [Industrial Commission, except as otherwise herein provided, shall be determined by the…”
Idaho State Ins. Fund v. Van Tine, 980 P.2d 566 (Idaho 1999). · cites it 3× “2d at 718 (quoting I.C. § 72-707 (1989)). See also Walters v.”
Owsley v. Idaho Indus. Com'n, 106 P.3d 455 (Idaho 2005). · cites it 2× “The Commission's Jurisdiction The first grounds for dismissal of the Claimants' action given by the district court was that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction.”
Downey Chiropractic Clinic v. Nampa Restaurant Corp., 900 P.2d 191 (Idaho 1995). · cites it 2× “Liberty argues that the magistrate court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate Dow-ney’s claim because it presents a question of law arising under our worker’s compensation law, namely: Whether Liberty, as Shilo Inn’s surety, has a statutory duty to pay for…”
Hernandez v. Triple Ell Transp., Inc., 175 P.3d 199 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 2× “Both parties concede that this policy included a forged signature of Hernandez on the application. Liberty Northwest correctly notes, though, that the issues of fraud relating to the forged signature are not within the purview of the Industrial Commission, and hence are not…”
Show all 28 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.