Log In
  • US
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Supreme Court
  • High Courts
    All High Courts
    Allahabad High Court
    Andhra Pradesh High Court
    Bombay High Court
    Calcutta High Court
    Chhattisgarh High Court
    Delhi High Court
    Gauhati High Court
    Gujarat High Court
    Himachal Pradesh High Court
    Jammu and Kashmir High Court
    Jharkhand High Court
    Karnataka High Court
    Kerala High Court
    Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Madras High Court
    Manipur High Court
    Meghalaya High Court
    Orissa High Court
    Patna High Court
    Punjab & Haryana High Court
    Rajasthan High Court
    Sikkim High Court
    Telangana High Court
    Tripura High Court
    Uttarakhand High Court
Log In Sign Up India Judgments
  • US
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments

Idaho Case Commentaries

Edwards v. Lane: Idaho Supreme Court Confirms Abuse-of-Discretion Review for Trustee Removal and Strict Appellate Briefing Requirements (with Fee-Shifting for Frivolous Appeals)

Edwards v. Lane: Idaho Supreme Court Confirms Abuse-of-Discretion Review for Trustee Removal and Strict Appellate Briefing Requirements (with Fee-Shifting for Frivolous Appeals)

Date: Oct 28, 2025
Edwards v. Lane: Abuse-of-Discretion Review Governs Trustee Removal; Appellate Waiver for Inadequate Briefing Triggers Fees Court: Idaho Supreme Court | Date: October 23, 2025 | Docket No.: 51237...
Premium-Based Injury Confers Standing, But Enforcement Is the Remedy: Idaho Supreme Court Limits Claims Arising from Illusory UIM Coverage

Premium-Based Injury Confers Standing, But Enforcement Is the Remedy: Idaho Supreme Court Limits Claims Arising from Illusory UIM Coverage

Date: Oct 4, 2025
Premium-Based Injury Confers Standing, But Enforcement Is the Remedy: Idaho Supreme Court Limits Claims Arising from Illusory UIM Coverage Case: Gilbert v. Progressive Northwestern Insurance Co.,...
Bypassing Batson Step One in Idaho: State v. Buck Clarifies Hernandez Mootness and Affirms Broad Trial-Court Discretion

Bypassing Batson Step One in Idaho: State v. Buck Clarifies Hernandez Mootness and Affirms Broad Trial-Court Discretion

Date: Oct 2, 2025
Bypassing Batson Step One in Idaho: State v. Buck Clarifies Hernandez Mootness and Affirms Broad Trial-Court Discretion Introduction In State v. Buck, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the conviction...
Master Plans Are Not Self-Executing: Idaho Supreme Court Holds Deed-Referenced Master Plans Are Relevant but Do Not Create Restrictive Covenants or Public Dedications Without Clear, Express Language

Master Plans Are Not Self-Executing: Idaho Supreme Court Holds Deed-Referenced Master Plans Are Relevant but Do Not Create Restrictive Covenants or Public Dedications Without Clear, Express Language

Date: Sep 11, 2025
Master Plans Are Not Self-Executing: Idaho Supreme Court Holds Deed-Referenced Master Plans Are Relevant but Do Not Create Restrictive Covenants or Public Dedications Without Clear, Express Language...
No-Modification Means No-Modification: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Grandfathered Lake Encroachments, Procedures, and Abatement Enforcement

No-Modification Means No-Modification: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Grandfathered Lake Encroachments, Procedures, and Abatement Enforcement

Date: Sep 6, 2025
No-Modification Means No-Modification: Temporary Post‑1974 Changes Defeat Grandfathered Lake Encroachment Permits; § 58‑1306 Procedures Inapplicable; Administrative Abatement Requires Judicial...
Limiting Anderson’s First‑Filed Rule: District Courts Need Not Defer to the Industrial Commission on Idaho Code § 72‑209(3) “Willful or Unprovoked Physical Aggression” — Dominguez Partially Overruled

Limiting Anderson’s First‑Filed Rule: District Courts Need Not Defer to the Industrial Commission on Idaho Code § 72‑209(3) “Willful or Unprovoked Physical Aggression” — Dominguez Partially Overruled

Date: Sep 5, 2025
Limiting Anderson’s First‑Filed Rule: District Courts Need Not Defer to the Industrial Commission on Idaho Code § 72‑209(3) “Willful or Unprovoked Physical Aggression” — Dominguez Partially Overruled...
Row v. State: Shinn Is Not a Trigger for Successive State Post‑Conviction Relief and Rule 44.2 Does Not Create a Right to Effective Post‑Conviction Counsel

Row v. State: Shinn Is Not a Trigger for Successive State Post‑Conviction Relief and Rule 44.2 Does Not Create a Right to Effective Post‑Conviction Counsel

Date: Sep 5, 2025
Row v. State: Shinn Is Not a Trigger for Successive State Post‑Conviction Relief and Rule 44.2 Does Not Create a Right to Effective Post‑Conviction Counsel Introduction In Row v. State, the Idaho...
Fraud Scienter Clarified and Disclosure Act Accrual Fixed at Closing: The Idaho Supreme Court’s Dual Holdings in VanRenselaar v. Batres

Fraud Scienter Clarified and Disclosure Act Accrual Fixed at Closing: The Idaho Supreme Court’s Dual Holdings in VanRenselaar v. Batres

Date: Sep 5, 2025
Fraud Scienter Clarified and Disclosure Act Accrual Fixed at Closing: The Idaho Supreme Court’s Dual Holdings in VanRenselaar v. Batres Introduction In VanRenselaar v. Batres, the Idaho Supreme Court...
Closing a Deed‑Reserved Highway Connection Is a Compensable Taking: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Substantial Impairment and Deed‑as‑Contract Enforcement

Closing a Deed‑Reserved Highway Connection Is a Compensable Taking: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Substantial Impairment and Deed‑as‑Contract Enforcement

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Closing a Deed‑Reserved Highway Connection Is a Compensable Taking: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Substantial Impairment and Deed‑as‑Contract Enforcement Introduction In Bear Crest Limited LLC v....
County Plat Changes Cannot Strip CC&Rs: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability, Road Construction, and Injunction Specificity in Jordan v. Powers

County Plat Changes Cannot Strip CC&Rs: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability, Road Construction, and Injunction Specificity in Jordan v. Powers

Date: Aug 31, 2025
County Plat Amendments Cannot Remove Land from CC&Rs; Roads Are Not Categorically Barred but Require Design Committee Approval Case: Jordan v. Powers, Supreme Court of Idaho (Aug. 28, 2025)...
Riverside Reaffirmed: Idaho Supreme Court Confirms Bench-Trier May Resolve Conflicting Inferences at Summary Judgment; No “Rent Substitution” Credit for Affiliate-Funded Construction Absent Proof

Riverside Reaffirmed: Idaho Supreme Court Confirms Bench-Trier May Resolve Conflicting Inferences at Summary Judgment; No “Rent Substitution” Credit for Affiliate-Funded Construction Absent Proof

Date: Aug 31, 2025
Riverside Reaffirmed: Bench-Trier Summary Judgment and the Limits of “Rent Substitution” under a Triple‑Net Lease Introduction In Erie Properties, LLC v. Global Growth Holdings, Inc., the Idaho...
State v. McGuire: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Dual “Duty” Standards—Broad for Felony Battery on Officers, Narrow (Lawfulness-Dependent) for Resisting; Burden-Shifting Misconduct Cured by Prompt Judicial Intervention

State v. McGuire: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Dual “Duty” Standards—Broad for Felony Battery on Officers, Narrow (Lawfulness-Dependent) for Resisting; Burden-Shifting Misconduct Cured by Prompt Judicial Intervention

Date: Aug 31, 2025
State v. McGuire: Idaho Supreme Court Clarifies Dual “Duty” Standards—Broad for Felony Battery on Officers, Narrow (Lawfulness-Dependent) for Resisting; Burden-Shifting Misconduct Cured by Prompt...
“Tax Debt = Debt”: The Idaho Supreme Court Requires Tax-Relief Firms to Obtain Collection-Agency Licences — Comment on Wall & Associates, Inc. v. Idaho Department of Finance (2025)

“Tax Debt = Debt”: The Idaho Supreme Court Requires Tax-Relief Firms to Obtain Collection-Agency Licences — Comment on Wall & Associates, Inc. v. Idaho Department of Finance (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Tax Debt = Debt”: The Idaho Supreme Court Requires Tax-Relief Firms to Obtain Collection-Agency Licences Commentary on Wall & Associates, Inc. v. Idaho Department of Finance, 174 Idaho ___ (2025) 1....
“Mission-Based Use” as a Religious Purpose: Idaho Supreme Court Broadens the Scope of the § 63-602B Property-Tax Exemption

“Mission-Based Use” as a Religious Purpose: Idaho Supreme Court Broadens the Scope of the § 63-602B Property-Tax Exemption

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Mission-Based Use” as a Religious Purpose: Idaho Supreme Court Broadens the Scope of the § 63-602B Property-Tax Exemption Introduction First Presbyterian Church of Boise, Idaho, Inc. (FPC) sought a...
Westman v. ISIF: The “Sole-Cause” Clarification of Idaho Code § 72-332 Liability

Westman v. ISIF: The “Sole-Cause” Clarification of Idaho Code § 72-332 Liability

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Westman v. Industrial Special Indemnity Fund: The Supreme Court of Idaho Clarifies the “Sole-Cause” Exception to Fund Liability under Idaho Code § 72-332 Introduction In Westman v. Industrial Special...
State v. Frias: Clarifying Proximate Causation and the “Criminal-Negligence” Threshold under Idaho Code § 18-7004

State v. Frias: Clarifying Proximate Causation and the “Criminal-Negligence” Threshold under Idaho Code § 18-7004

Date: Aug 25, 2025
State v. Frias: Clarifying Proximate Causation and the “Criminal-Negligence” Threshold under Idaho Code § 18-7004 Introduction In State v. Frias, Docket No. 50950-2023 (Idaho Aug. 20, 2025), the...

        DeKlotz v. NS Support, LLC – Medical Liens Under I.C. § 45-704B Are
        “Extraordinary Collection Actions” Requiring Full Compliance with the Idaho Patient Act

DeKlotz v. NS Support, LLC – Medical Liens Under I.C. § 45-704B Are “Extraordinary Collection Actions” Requiring Full Compliance with the Idaho Patient Act

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Medical Liens Under I.C. § 45-704B Are “Extraordinary Collection Actions”: Commentary on DeKlotz v. NS Support, LLC, 174 Idaho ___ (2025) 1. Introduction In DeKlotz v. NS Support, LLC the Idaho...

        Idaho Supreme Court Abandons Statute-of-Limitations Bar for Easements by Necessity 
        and Expands Discretion to Revisit “Law-of-the-Case”:  Easterling v. Clark (“Easterling II”)

Idaho Supreme Court Abandons Statute-of-Limitations Bar for Easements by Necessity and Expands Discretion to Revisit “Law-of-the-Case”: Easterling v. Clark (“Easterling II”)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Idaho Supreme Court Abandons Statute-of-Limitations Bar for Easements by Necessity and Expands Discretion to Revisit “Law-of-the-Case” Doctrine: Detailed Commentary on Easterling v. Clark (2025) 1....
“No Shortcuts to Summary Judgment” –  Rupp v. City of Pocatello and the Idaho Supreme Court’s Dual Message on Discovery Diligence and Rule 56 Analysis

“No Shortcuts to Summary Judgment” – Rupp v. City of Pocatello and the Idaho Supreme Court’s Dual Message on Discovery Diligence and Rule 56 Analysis

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No Shortcuts to Summary Judgment” – Rupp v. City of Pocatello and the Idaho Supreme Court’s Dual Message on Discovery Diligence and Rule 56 Analysis Introduction Rupp v. City of Pocatello, 174 Idaho...
Smith v. State: Defining the Limits of “Counsel Abandonment” and Pro-Se Filings in Idaho Post-Conviction Practice

Smith v. State: Defining the Limits of “Counsel Abandonment” and Pro-Se Filings in Idaho Post-Conviction Practice

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Smith v. State: Defining the Limits of “Counsel Abandonment” and Pro-Se Filings in Idaho Post-Conviction Practice 1. Introduction The Idaho Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Smith v. State, Docket No....
Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • Judgment Takedown Policy (India)
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases
  • Acts

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert