Cathy Silak

The case involved landowners operating a garage who sued the Twin Falls Highway District and Idaho Transportation Department after the agencies transferred a dedicated access road abutting their property to become part of a highway expansion project that included a buffer zone with curb and gutter, eliminating the road's prior use for parking and vehicle maneuvering. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding no taking because there was no substantial impairment of access. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the ruling that loss of parking did not constitute a taking but reversed on the buffer zone issue, holding that converting the access road into part of the state highway system changed the character of the dedicated use and thus amounted to a compensable taking under inverse condemnation principles; the case was remanded to determine the amount of compensation owed.

propertybusiness & regulatory

Selkirk Seed Company sued the State Insurance Fund, alleging that the Fund lacked statutory authority to include "Part Two — Employers Liability Insurance" in its workers' compensation policies sold to Idaho employers and seeking rescission, an injunction, and return of associated premiums. The district court granted summary judgment to the Fund, and the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed. The Court held that the Fund was authorized to sell the coverage because Part Two indemnifies employers against bodily injury claims arising out of employment that fall outside the exclusive remedies of the workers' compensation statute, such as claims brought in other states or under exceptions like willful misconduct. It further ruled that Part Two qualifies as insurance under Idaho law because it addresses real and determinable risks, rendering the requests for premium refunds and class certification moot.

business & regulatorylabor & employment

Roseann Steen was terminated from her job as a server at Denny's Restaurant after three disciplinary reports for cash register shortages and mishandling payments in violation of company policy. She sought unemployment insurance benefits, but the Idaho Department of Labor and Industrial Commission found her ineligible under Idaho Code Section 72-1366(5) due to employee misconduct. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the Commission's decision, holding that it was supported by substantial and competent evidence of deliberate rule violations and rejecting procedural challenges regarding the timeliness of filings and representation by a corporate officer. The majority concluded that the findings met the standard for misconduct warranting denial of benefits.

labor & employment

This case concerned a challenge to Idaho Code § 34-907B, a statute from a 1998 ballot initiative that required the Secretary of State to add legends next to candidates' names on ballots for U.S. Congress indicating whether they had signed a term-limits pledge or broken it, along with posting the pledge text at polling places. Petitioners, registered voters, sought a writ of prohibition and declaratory relief arguing that the law violated free speech and voting rights under the Idaho and U.S. Constitutions. The Idaho Supreme Court held that the ballot-legend requirements were unconstitutional, issued a writ barring the Secretary from implementing subsections (3) and (4), and invalidated subsection (5) as non-severable. The core reasoning was that the mandated legends compelled candidates to convey a specific message about term limits, infringing protected speech rights. A dissent contended that the petitioners lacked standing due to absence of particularized injury.

electionsfree speech

This case involved a worker's compensation claim by Gerald Mulder against Liberty Northwest Insurance for medical benefits related to bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome developed from his job duties as a loss prevention consultant, which included extensive driving, handwriting notes, and computer use. The Idaho Industrial Commission ruled that the condition constituted a single occupational disease and awarded benefits for surgery on the left hand. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that substantial evidence supported the finding of an occupational disease peculiar to the claimant's occupation and that medical benefits under Idaho Code § 72-432 are available without requiring proof of total disability, which applies only to other forms of compensation under § 72-437.

labor & employment

The Cooks sued Skyline Corporation, the manufacturer of their defective manufactured home, and Norwest, the dealer and installer, for breach of contract and warranty, negligent selection and repair, and violations of the Idaho Consumer Protection Act, seeking damages including for emotional distress. After a jury verdict in the Cooks' favor, the district court granted Skyline's motion for a new trial, finding error in the admission of certain witness testimony about similar defects and the drip edge installation as well as in allowing an unpled negligent retention claim and the emotional distress damages without sufficient medical evidence. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court held that the district court abused its discretion in ordering a new trial on those bases, ruling that the objected-to testimony was not improperly admitted as a post-incident design change, that lay testimony could support some non-medical emotional distress symptoms, and that the case should be remanded for the district court to reconsider the new trial motion and the scope of required expert testimony.

proceduretorts & liabilityproperty