Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 9-318 (2026)

Official reports as evidence — Cross-examination. 

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

Official reports as evidence — Cross-examination. 

Any adverse party may cross-examine any person making such reports or findings or any person furnishing information used therein; but the fact that such testimony may not be obtainable shall not affect the admissibility of the report or finding, unless, in the opinion of the court, the adverse party is unfairly prejudiced thereby.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1961–1983 · leading case: Idaho Bank & Trust Co. v. Cargill, Inc., 665 P.2d 1093 (Idaho Ct. App. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Idaho Bank & Trust Co. v. Cargill, Inc., 665 P.2d 1093 (Idaho Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “2d 471, 473 (1974), stated it as follows: Section 9-318(3) [of the UCC] clearly delineates the legal relationship between the account debtor and the assignee once the account debtor receives adequate notification of an assignment.”
Bell Ex Rel. Bell v. O'Connor Transp. Ltd., 489 P.2d 439 (Idaho 1971). · cites it 3× “In accord with the provisions of I.C. § 9-318, the officer who made the report testified at trial and was subject to cross examination, as was every person upon whose statements the officer based his report.”
Johnson v. Boise Cascade Corp., 456 P.2d 751 (Idaho 1969). · cites it 2× “See I.C. § 9-318. To the extent that Dr. Bovenmyer concurred in the conclusion of the report that respondent was 60% disabled, he rendered a professional opinion.”
State v. Wendler, 360 P.2d 697 (Idaho 1961). · cites it 2× “§ 9-315 — which we do not decide — no subpoena was sought by the defendant to procure attendance of the officers or agents of the department, who made the report or finding or furnished the information used therein, for cross-examination.”
Idaho Code § 9-318(3): 1 case
Idaho Bank & Trust Co. v. Cargill, Inc., 665 P.2d 1093 (Idaho Ct. App. 1983). “2d 471, 473 (1974), stated it as follows: Section 9-318(3) [of the UCC] clearly delineates the legal relationship between the account debtor and the assignee once the account debtor receives adequate notification of an assignment.”
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.