Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 9-504 (2026)

Exceptions to preceding section. 

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

Exceptions to preceding section. 

The preceding section must not be construed to affect the power of a testator in the disposition of his real property by a last will and testament, nor to prevent any trust from arising or being extinguished by implication or operation of law, nor to abridge the power of any court to compel the specific performance of an agreement, in case of part performance thereof.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 43 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1952–2025 · leading case: Johnson v. McPhee, 210 P.3d 563 (Idaho Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Johnson v. McPhee, 210 P.3d 563 (Idaho Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “Idaho Code § 9-504 states: The preceding section must not be construed to .”
Marian G. Hoke v. NeYada, Inc., 387 P.3d 118 (Idaho 2016). · cites it 6× “We disagree. Idaho Code section 9-504 provides that the statue of frauds “must not be construed to .”
Bear Island Water Ass'n, Inc. v. Brown, 874 P.2d 528 (Idaho 1994). · cites it 4× “To support this argument, BIWA cites the fact that Ray Andrus and David Jones both submitted affidavits in which they stated that during them respective periods of ownership they considered BIWA to be the owner of the culinary water system. BIWA asserts that these affidavit…”
Sec. Inv. Fund LLC v. Crumb, 443 P.3d 1036 (Idaho 2019). · cites it 4× “However, Idaho Code section 9-504 establishes an exception to the statute of frauds, i.”
Roundy v. Waner, 570 P.2d 862 (Idaho 1977). · cites it 4× “1 To deal with this theory would mire us down in the technicalities of trust law and is not necessary in view of the disposition which we make. We prefer to address the questions of equity more directly, as they are raised by the trial court’s alternative rationale, namely, that…”
Wing v. Munns, 849 P.2d 954 (Idaho Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “The second is I.C. § 9-504: The preceding section must not be construed to affect the power of a testator in the disposition of his real property by a last will and testament, nor to prevent any trust from arising or being extinguished by implication or operation of law, nor to…”
Suter v. Suter, 546 P.2d 1169 (Idaho 1976). · cites it 2× “An exception to the requirement of a writing to convey land preserves the validity of the joint gift of the eighty-acre parcel in 1951. The appellant based her second challenge on I.”
Chapin v. Linden, 162 P.3d 772 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 2× “” I.C. § 9-504. The doctrine of part performance provides that when the parties to an agreement fail to reduce the agreement to writing, or otherwise fail to satisfy the statute of frauds, the agreement “may nevertheless be specifically enforced when the purchaser has partly…”
MacK Fin. Corp. v. Scott, 606 P.2d 993 (Idaho 1980). · cites it 2× “Neither can this section be fairly construed to mean that the requirements of Section 9-504(3) that the ‘time’ and ‘terms’ must be commercially reasonable are to be ignored.”
Hettinga v. Sybrandy, 886 P.2d 772 (Idaho 1994). · cites it 2× “Although a trust in real property can arise by implication or operation of law without such a writing, I.C. § 9-504, a person claiming ownership through such a trust “ ‘must establish such claim by evidence that is clear, satisfactory and convincing.”
Frantz v. Parke, 729 P.2d 1068 (Idaho Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “Compare I.C. § 9-504 (explicitly referring to part performance of land sale contracts under I.”
Dunagan v. Dunagan, 213 P.3d 384 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 2× “Kircher argues that this Court should, for the first time, apply the doctrine of partial performance to oral prenuptial agreements. Idaho recognizes the doctrine of partial performance, which is an exception to the statute of frauds that permits a court to compel specific…”
Show all 43 citing cases →
— Idaho Code § 9-504(3) — 1 case
MacK Fin. Corp. v. Scott, 606 P.2d 993 (Idaho 1980). “Neither can this section be fairly construed to mean that the requirements of Section 9-504(3) that the ‘time’ and ‘terms’ must be commercially reasonable are to be ignored.”
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.