James W. Porter

In State v. Barter, a doctor was charged with reckless driving, a misdemeanor, after being stopped by police while traveling between his offices. A complaint filed in probate court was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds due to a prior traffic citation in justice court, but a second complaint was then filed in probate court describing the offense as occurring only south of a certain town rather than both north and south. The defendant was convicted in probate court and again on appeal in district court. The Idaho Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the dismissal of the first complaint barred prosecution under the second complaint because the two charged the same offense under Idaho Code sections 19-3504 and 19-3506, which make such a dismissal a bar to further prosecution of misdemeanors.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Pefley, the appellant pleaded guilty in justice court to driving under the influence, paid the imposed fine, and had the jail sentence suspended, after which the Department of Law Enforcement revoked his driver's license for one year. He then sought to appeal the conviction to district court, claiming the justice of the peace had misadvised him, but the state moved to dismiss on grounds that voluntary payment of the fine had satisfied the judgment. The district court dismissed the appeal, and the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that under the weight of authority a defendant who fully satisfies a criminal judgment by paying the fine waives the right to appeal, rendering the matter moot as there is nothing left for an appellate court to act upon. The court further reasoned that the separate administrative license revocation was not part of the justice court judgment and did not preserve a right to appeal after voluntary satisfaction.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a workers' compensation claim filed by the minor children of Wendell Hillenbrand, who was killed in a car accident in Idaho while traveling on company business for Consolidated Freightways. Hillenbrand had been employed in Washington, transferred to Oregon, and sent to Boise for work; after completing a personal side trip to visit relatives, he was returning on the direct route when the fatal collision occurred. The Industrial Accident Board awarded benefits, and the employer and insurer appealed, arguing that the accident did not arise in the course of employment due to the deviation, that Idaho lacked jurisdiction because the employment contract was made outside the state, and that Oregon law should control under the Full Faith and Credit Clause. The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the award, holding that the personal deviation had ended and Hillenbrand had resumed his employment duties at the time of the accident, that Idaho properly exercised jurisdiction over an in-state injury under its workers' compensation law, and that neither the place of contracting nor Oregon's more limited extraterritorial rules barred application of Idaho law.

labor & employment

The case involved appellants seeking to enjoin the Idaho Secretary of State from certifying an initiative petition titled "Initiative Measure for Right to Employment Regardless of Labor Organization Membership" for the November 1958 general election ballot, based on claims of insufficient valid signatures and failures to follow statutory requirements in the petition process. The trial court sustained a demurrer and dismissed the complaint. By the time the appeal reached the Idaho Supreme Court, the election had taken place, the measure had been defeated by voters, and the court determined that the issues had become moot with no remaining actual controversy or possibility of effective relief.

electionslabor & employment

The case involved a worker's compensation claim by respondent Townsend for an injury to his right eye from a foreign substance, which he alleged occurred during his employment cleaning a pumphouse for Cahoon Construction Company. The Industrial Accident Board awarded compensation after finding that the accident most likely happened during the cleanup work, and the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the award on appeal. The court reasoned that the evidence established by a preponderance of the evidence that the injury occurred during employment, as the hazardous dusty conditions at work made that the most probable cause over the brief period after termination, and the claimant was not required to exclude all other possibilities. The court disregarded an unnecessary recital about prior compensation payments as surplusage.

labor & employment

This case involved a personal injury lawsuit brought by plaintiff Hubble against defendant Lloyd Record after Hubble was struck and injured by a homemade mechanical sweep device on one of Record's trucks while working as a pea pitcher during harvest operations on leased farmland. Smith Frozen Foods of Idaho, Inc., which had leased the land and arranged for the harvest, was dismissed from the case. The jury found Record negligent and awarded Hubble $42,833 in damages, which the trial court reduced by $10,000 before denying Record's motion for a new trial on grounds of excessiveness and passion or prejudice. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the reduced judgment, holding that substantial evidence supported the jury's finding of negligence, that contributory negligence was properly a question for the jury rather than a matter of law, and that the modified verdict was not so disproportionate to the injuries as to require further reduction or a new trial.

torts & liabilityprocedure