Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Davis v. Hammack Management, Inc.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 2017No. Docket 43863Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHorton, J.

I respectfully dissent from Part IV(B) of the Court’s opinion. In my view, the pivotal question the Court is asked to decide is whether to give precedence to the terms of Idaho Code section 72-711 or Idaho Code section 72-718.3 As Claimant properly notes, Idaho Code section 72-711 provides that a compensation agreement “shall be approved by the commission only when the terms conform to the provisions of this law.”

Idaho Code section 72-718 provides:

A decision of the commission, in the absence of fraud, shall be final and conclusive as to all matters adjudicated by the commission upon filing…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bybee v. State, Indus. Special Indem.Idaho Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Wernecke v. St. Maries Joint School District 401Idaho Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Vawter v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Sund v. GambrelIdaho Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Fowler v. City of RexburgIdaho Supreme Court · 1989

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API