Legal Opinion
Farrell v. Whiteman
Idaho Supreme Court
Decided January 22, 2009No. 34383PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
J. JONES, Justice.
Damian Farrell sued Kent Whiteman to recover for architect services he rendered for Whiteman’s condominium project in Ketchum. Whiteman asserted that Farrell was not entitled to be compensated because of his failure to comply with Idaho’s architect licensing statutes. After a bench trial the district court awarded Farrell damages, and Whiteman appealed. We vacate the damage award and remand for further proceedings to determine damages.
I
Farrell, a Michigan-licensed architect, and Whiteman, a real estate developer, 1 both Michigan residents, were friends for many years.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- J.R. Simplot Company, Inc. v. Idaho State Tax CommissionIdaho Supreme Court · 1991
- Miller v. HallerIdaho Supreme Court · 1996
- Barry v. Pacific West Construction, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2004
- Nelson v. ArmstrongIdaho Supreme Court · 1978
- Quiring v. QuiringIdaho Supreme Court · 1997
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- AED, Inc. v. KDC Investments, LLCIdaho Supreme Court · 2013
- City of Meridian v. PETRA Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2013
- Taylor v. AIA Services Corp.Idaho Supreme Court · 2011
- Hill v. American Family Mutual InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 2011
- Turcott v. Estate of BatesIdaho Supreme Court · 2019
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.