William D. Keeton

This case involved a claim and delivery action by seller A. L. Nowels against buyer Ketchersid Music, Inc. to recover possession of phonographic equipment or the remaining purchase price after the buyer defaulted on payments under six conditional sales contracts that had been assigned to a finance company. The contracts included a guaranty by the seller of full payment and an acceleration clause; after the assignee demanded and received full payment from the seller following default, the seller demanded return of the property or payment from the buyer, who refused. The trial court overruled a demurrer, found the buyer in default, and entered judgment for the seller, which the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that the seller became the real party in interest entitled to possession by operation of law upon paying the accelerated balance to the assignee under the guaranty, as the buyer was no longer entitled to possession under the defaulted contracts. The decision relied on the terms of the assignments and guaranties, principles of replevin as a possessory action, and precedents recognizing a conditional seller's rights after honoring a guaranty.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

This case involved an employee who sued his employer for damages after injuring his foot and leg when his pants caught in the unguarded power take-off of a John Deere tractor on the defendant's farm in 1955. The plaintiff alleged negligence in removing the safety shield and allowing operation of the dangerous machinery, while the defendant raised defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of risk. A jury awarded the plaintiff $2,000, and the trial court entered judgment on the verdict and denied a new trial. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the issues of contributory negligence and assumption of risk were properly submitted to the jury rather than resolved as a matter of law, and that the jury instructions adequately explained the employer's duty without making the employer an insurer of safety.

labor & employmenttorts & liability

Bohemian Breweries, a licensed beer manufacturer and distributor in Idaho, implemented a consumer "cash caps" promotion allowing buyers to mail in bottle caps for cash redemptions of 50 cents per set. The Commissioner of Law Enforcement initiated proceedings to suspend or revoke the brewery's license, claiming violations of Idaho Code § 23-1013(5) and (9) by providing valuable property to retailers without adjusting posted prices and by aiding retailers. The district court granted an injunction halting the administrative action, and the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the promotion did not violate the statutes because redemptions were limited to consumers and not retailers, the brewery had acted in good faith after receiving favorable legal advice, and equity permits judicial intervention to prevent irreparable injury when an agency lacks authority to proceed.

business & regulatoryprocedure

In Martin v. Soden, respondents moved to dismiss an appeal from a May 9, 1957 district court judgment on grounds that the appellant failed to file a notice of appeal and cost undertaking with the court clerk within the ninety-day period required by Idaho Code sections 13-201 and 13-202. The appellant had presented the documents to the presiding judge in early June 1957, with actual filing occurring only on November 27, 1957, after the file was later delivered to the clerk. The court determined that filings with the trial judge do not comply with the statutes, which designate the clerk as the required recipient, and that these steps are jurisdictional prerequisites for an appeal. Because more than ninety days had elapsed without proper filing, the court concluded it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.

procedure

The case involved an appellant who filed a replevin action in 1954 seeking recovery of personal property or its value plus $500 in damages from respondents and others. After respondents' attorney withdrew and they received notice but failed to appear, the trial court entered a default judgment against them in October 1956. Respondents later moved to set aside the default under Idaho Code Sec. 5-905, claiming excusable neglect due to issues with retaining new counsel, and the trial court granted the motion in 1958. The Idaho Supreme Court reversed, holding that the record showed no mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, as respondents were notified of the proceedings and their delay did not reflect the actions of a reasonably prudent person.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a criminal complaint filed in justice court charging the defendant with lewd and lascivious conduct under Idaho law, based on a sworn statement from a witness without personal knowledge of the facts. The defendant moved to quash the information in district court, arguing lack of jurisdiction due to the hearsay basis of the complaint and warrant, and the district court granted the motion and dismissed the case. The Idaho Supreme Court reversed, holding that a positively verified criminal complaint is sufficient to support issuance of an arrest warrant and filing of an information. The court reasoned that the defendant's waiver of a preliminary hearing eliminated any requirement for supporting depositions or personal-knowledge affidavits, and that no constitutional violation occurred. The case was remanded with instructions to reinstate the information and proceed.

criminal lawprocedure

This case is an eminent domain action in which the State sought to condemn 12.76 acres of the defendant's farm, along with abutting access rights, to build a limited-access highway that would replace an existing road. The trial court determined that the taking was for a public use and necessity, prohibited the defendant's prior access, and awarded damages after a jury trial. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court held that state statutes authorize the condemnation of land and access rights for controlled-access highways and affirmed the findings of public use and necessity. However, the court reversed the damages judgment and ordered a new trial because the jury had not been properly instructed on the elements of compensation, including the value of land and improvements taken and severance damages from restricted access to the old highway and railroad. The core reasoning rested on statutory authority for such takings and the legal requirement to instruct the jury on all compensable damages supported by the evidence.

propertyprocedure

In this workers' compensation case, the widow and minor child of a miner sought death benefits from Sunshine Mining Company after the worker fell from a staging underground on December 20, 1956, sustaining minor injuries, continued working, and died on December 27 from an acute coronary thrombosis. The Industrial Accident Board denied the claim, finding no causal link between the fall, subsequent work, or working conditions and the death. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that claimants failed to meet their burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that an industrial accident caused the death, as medical experts testified there was no connection and possibilities alone are insufficient. The court also upheld the exclusion of certain repetitive testimony as properly rejected.

labor & employment

In this case, a natural gas pipeline company filed a condemnation action under Idaho law to obtain a limited easement across the defendants' land for constructing a transmission pipeline. After commissioners appointed by the court assessed damages, the plaintiff declined to pay the award or take possession and instead proceeded to a jury trial on the issue of damages, which resulted in a lower award to the defendants. The defendants argued that the plaintiff should be bound by the commissioners' determination without a specific objection, but the court held that under Sec. 7-717, I.C., the condemnor is not obligated to accept the commissioners' findings unless it elects to pay and take possession, and either party may seek a jury trial as in other civil actions. The court also upheld the jury instructions on valuation and severance damages, as well as the admission of certain evidence, finding no reversible error. Judgment was affirmed, with costs awarded to the defendants.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a teacher, Alice B. Murray, who sued Joint Class B. School District No. 181 for breach of her employment contract after the district discharged her mid-year following a hearing on charges including neglect of duty, insubordination, and unprofessional behavior. The trial court directed a verdict for the plaintiff, awarding her the remaining contract salary plus damages for use of a teacherage, on the ground that the discharge was unlawful. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court reversed, holding that the discharge hearing complied with statutory procedures under Idaho Code sections 33-714 and related rules, that the trial court erred in excluding evidence about the board's deliberations and in directing a verdict, and that factual issues regarding just cause remained to be resolved by a jury. The court further ruled that the teacherage claim was not part of the written contract and could not support additional recovery. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved a property owner's appeal of the assessed value of improvements on his commercial lots in Pocatello for 1956 ad valorem taxes, after the county board of equalization and state tax commission upheld the assessor's valuation of $11,446. The district court affirmed without findings, but the Idaho Supreme Court reversed, holding that the valuation method—based on 1937-1941 replacement costs less depreciation, then reduced to 35%—was invalid because it did not determine the property's current full cash value as required by Idaho Code sections 63-202 and 63-111, and it failed to ensure uniformity with other property in the county, which was generally assessed at about 13% of actual cash value. The court reasoned that assessments must apply the same standard of value to all property to satisfy constitutional uniformity requirements, and directed remand for findings and a reduced assessment conforming to that lower percentage standard.

taxesproperty

This case involves the Idaho State Bar charging defendant Meservy with contempt of court for allegedly practicing law without a license in Fremont County. The court addressed preliminary motions regarding the complaint, including a motion to strike certain paragraphs and a special demurrer challenging the sufficiency of allegations. The court denied the motion to strike Paragraph IV, which properly alleged the plaintiffs' capacity to bring the action; granted the motion to strike Paragraph V as it stated a legal conclusion rather than facts; and sustained the demurrer to subdivision (c) of Paragraph VII because it lacked sufficient detail about specific acts, times, places, and persons involved, failing to adequately inform the defendant of the charges. Plaintiffs were given leave to file an amended complaint.

criminal lawprocedure

This case concerns the validity of a release of judgment in a prior dispute between the Finches and Wallberg Dredging Company. After an earlier reversal, an individual purporting to be the company's president recorded a satisfaction of judgment without authority or consideration; the trial court found he had never held that office and set the release aside as void. The court also denied motions to disqualify defendant's attorneys for alleged conflicts and to continue the hearing, ruling that the attorneys had no disqualifying prior involvement in the matter. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the unauthorized release had no legal effect and that the procedural and disqualification rulings involved no error or abuse of discretion.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

In State v. Pigge, the defendant was charged with reckless driving under Idaho Code Sec. 49-503 but convicted by a jury of the lesser offense of negligent driving under a 1951 statute (Ch. 256), which defined the crime as operating a vehicle "in such a manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger any persons or property." The Idaho Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding the negligent driving statute unconstitutional and void for uncertainty because it failed to specify any particular acts or require negligence, allowing punishment for non-criminal conduct and leaving ordinary people unable to determine what behavior was prohibited. The court reasoned that a criminal statute creating a new offense must clearly define prohibited acts to satisfy due process, citing precedents like State v. Burns that emphasize the need for certainty so individuals can know whether they have violated the law. On rehearing, the court ordered the action dismissed rather than remanding for retrial on the original charge.

criminal law

In Cobas v. Clapp, the appellant filed a habeas corpus petition in district court seeking release from the Idaho State Penitentiary, where he was held under a robbery conviction and sentence of up to twenty years from the District Court of Twin Falls County. The lower court found that the appellant had voluntarily and intelligently waived his preliminary hearing, right to counsel at arraignment, and entered a guilty plea, then quashed the writ and remanded him to custody; the appellant challenged these findings and the lack of appointed counsel in the habeas proceeding itself. The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the record showed proper waivers under state statutes, that the trial court had jurisdiction to accept the plea and impose judgment, that alleged irregularities in the original proceedings could not be raised for the first time in habeas corpus, and that there is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a habeas corpus action.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

The case involves a post-divorce dispute over the division and payment of support obligations from a 1944 divorce decree that awarded custody of a minor child to the plaintiff and required the defendant to pay $20 per week for the support of the plaintiff and child. In supplemental proceedings, the court addressed how to allocate the weekly amount between alimony and child support, the effect of the plaintiff's remarriage on the obligations, and the calculation of arrears including interest. The court determined that a common-law marriage occurred in December 1944, so the full $20 weekly amount applied only until then and $10 weekly applied thereafter for child support until the child's majority, with 6% interest due on unpaid installments from the dates they became due; it recalculated the total balance owed and directed modification of the trial court's order accordingly while affirming the order as modified.

family law

The case involved former officers of a mining corporation who sued for amounts allegedly owed on an account stated and for rent of office space and equipment, while also initially seeking to enjoin a stock assessment sale that later became moot after the shares were sold for nonpayment of a subsequent assessment. The corporation counterclaimed for breaches of fiduciary duty and unaccounted funds during the plaintiffs' tenure. The trial court dismissed the plaintiffs' monetary claims, found no indebtedness, dismissed the counterclaim as barred by limitations, laches, and acquiescence, and taxed costs against the plaintiffs. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the judgment because the plaintiffs had not provided a complete transcript of the evidence, requiring the court to presume the trial court's factual findings were supported, and because issues regarding costs and bond exoneration were either not properly preserved or not reviewable on the record presented.

business & regulatoryprocedureproperty

The case concerned whether the Idaho Commissioner of Labor was required to hold a second election on union representation for employees of Pumice Products, Inc., shortly after an initial election had resulted in union certification. The court held that the Commissioner must conduct the election upon the employer's request. It reasoned that the governing statute mandates an election whenever a question arises concerning employee representation in a bargaining unit and a request is made by the employer or employees, without imposing any waiting period, and that the Commissioner's regulation adding a one-year restriction exceeded his statutory authority and was therefore void.

labor & employmentbusiness & regulatory

The case involved a claim by Gladys E. Lincoln Gramm, the former wife of decedent Henry Lincoln, against his estate for unpaid monthly payments under a 1938 agreement. The claim was submitted after the deadline for creditor claims had passed, and no timely request for an extension was made. The probate court approved the final account and distributed the estate to the widow without addressing the claim, and later denied a petition to set aside the decree. The district court affirmed, and the Idaho Supreme Court held that the claim was barred for failure to comply with statutory timing requirements for presentation and extensions, and that issues not raised in probate court could not be introduced on appeal.

family lawpropertyprocedure

The case involved a dispute over whether defendant Le Fevre's 1954 construction of a dam on his land in Doney Hollow, authorized by a state permit to store up to 75 acre-feet of water, interfered with plaintiff Franklin Cub River Pumping Company's 1919 appropriation of water from Cub River for irrigation. The plaintiff alleged that the dam stopped runoff, seepage, springs, and other waters from reaching its pumping plant, while the defendant contended these were waste or surplus waters he could lawfully recapture on his property. After a trial, the court found no substantial evidence that appreciable water from Doney Hollow reached the plaintiff's diversion point during the irrigation season, that the defendant held superior rights to the impounded waters, and that a bypass could handle any surplus. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for the defendant, holding that the trial court's findings were supported by the evidence and that the defendant was entitled to recapture seepage and waste water for beneficial use without diminishing the plaintiff's established rights.

property