Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 9-202 (2026)
Who may not testify.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Who may not testify.
The following persons cannot be witnesses:
1. Those who are of unsound mind at the time of their production for examination.
2. Children under ten (10) years of age, who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly. At the time a child under the age of ten (10) years of age is called to testify in any court proceeding, the court shall conduct a hearing in chambers to determine whether the child qualifies as a witness under this section. In conducting such hearing the court shall take every reasonable means necessary to prevent intimidation or harassment of the child by the parties or their attorneys. The judge, rather than the parties, shall examine the child but he shall do so in the presence of the parties and he shall pose to the child any reasonable questions requested by the parties and previously submitted to the court. The judge may rephrase any questions so that the child is not intimidated.
3. Parties or assignors of parties to an action or proceeding, or persons in whose behalf an action or proceeding is prosecuted against an executor or administrator, upon a claim or demand against the estate of a deceased person, as to any communication or agreement, not in writing, occurring before the death of such deceased person.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1943–2021 · leading case: Carpenter v. TURRELL, 227 P.3d 575 (Idaho 2010).
Carpenter v. TURRELL, 227 P.3d 575 (Idaho 2010). “Idaho Code § 9-202 (3) provides: § 9-202.”
Argyle v. Slemaker, 585 P.2d 954 (Idaho 1978). “Respondents argue that summary judgment was proper in this case because appellants’ testimony concerning the deed is barred by I.C. § 9-202(3), the Idaho Dead Man’s Statute.”
James Adam Slavens v. Melanie Slavens, 384 P.3d 962 (Idaho 2016). “The Deadman’s Statute makes the following witnesses incompetent to testify: Parties or assignors of parties to an action or proceeding, or persons in whose behalf an action or proceeding is prosecuted against an executor or administrator, upon a claim or demand against the…”
Matter of Est. of Keeven, 716 P.2d 1224 (Idaho 1986). “In its Memorandum Decision and Order, dated June 30, 1983, the magistrate court refused to consider Keeven's affidavit of the oral agreement between himself and the decedent since such testimony would violate I.C. § 9-202(3) (Idaho's Deadman Statute).”
Montgomery v. Montgomery, 205 P.3d 650 (Idaho 2009). “On remand, the district court should instruct the trial court to rule on objections prior to determining whether summary judgment is appropriate as to Nancy’s partnership claim.”
Kolouch v. First SEC. Bank of Idaho, 911 P.2d 779 (Idaho Ct. App. 1996). “” Idaho Code Section 9-202(3) provides that the following persons cannot be witnesses: 3 (3) Parties or assignors of parties to an action or proceeding, or persons in whose behalf an action or proceeding is prosecuted against an executor or administrator, upon a claim or demand…”
Idaho v. Wright, 497 U.S. 805 (1990). “Although Idaho law provides that a child witness may not testify if he "appear[s] incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly," Idaho Code § 9-202 (Supp. 1989); Idaho Rule Evid.”
Kentucky v. Stincer, 482 U.S. 730 (1987). “§ 24-9-5 (1982); Idaho Code § 9-202 (Supp. 1986); Ind. Code § 34-1-14-5 (1986); Mich.”
Quayle v. MacKert, 447 P.2d 679 (Idaho 1968). “Appellants contend that this was contrary to I.C. § 9-202 (3). Respondent Manx Quayle is admittedly a “party” under the statute.”
Simons v. Simons, 11 P.3d 20 (Idaho 2000). “Idaho Code § 9-202 states in relevant part: 9-202.”
State v. Fain, 774 P.2d 252 (Idaho 1989). “The majority opinion confuses credibility with competency.”
State v. Iwakiri, 682 P.2d 571 (Idaho 1984). “§ 9-201; I.C. § 9-202. The recently adopted Federal Rules of Evidence, applicable in the federal courts, provide a further example of the continued evolution of a general rule of competency by establishing a rule which reads, "Every person is competent to be a witness except as…”
— Idaho Code § 9-202(1) — 1 case
State v. Fain, 774 P.2d 252 (Idaho 1989). “The majority opinion confuses credibility with competency.”
— Idaho Code § 9-202(2) — 2 cases
State v. Griffith, 161 P.3d 675 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Poole, 859 P.2d 944 (Idaho 1993).
— Idaho Code § 9-202(3) — 26 cases
Carpenter v. TURRELL, 227 P.3d 575 (Idaho 2010). “Idaho Code § 9-202 (3) provides: § 9-202.”
Argyle v. Slemaker, 585 P.2d 954 (Idaho 1978). “Respondents argue that summary judgment was proper in this case because appellants’ testimony concerning the deed is barred by I.C. § 9-202(3), the Idaho Dead Man’s Statute.”
James Adam Slavens v. Melanie Slavens, 384 P.3d 962 (Idaho 2016). “The Deadman’s Statute makes the following witnesses incompetent to testify: Parties or assignors of parties to an action or proceeding, or persons in whose behalf an action or proceeding is prosecuted against an executor or administrator, upon a claim or demand against the…”
Matter of Est. of Keeven, 716 P.2d 1224 (Idaho 1986). “In its Memorandum Decision and Order, dated June 30, 1983, the magistrate court refused to consider Keeven's affidavit of the oral agreement between himself and the decedent since such testimony would violate I.C. § 9-202(3) (Idaho's Deadman Statute).”
Montgomery v. Montgomery, 205 P.3d 650 (Idaho 2009). “On remand, the district court should instruct the trial court to rule on objections prior to determining whether summary judgment is appropriate as to Nancy’s partnership claim.”
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.