Legal Opinion

Eby v. State

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 2010No. 36568PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HORTON, Justice.

After years of shocking and disgraceful neglect of his case by a series of attorneys appointed to represent Daniel Lee Eby (Eby), his petition for post-conviction relief was dismissed for inactivity pursuant to I.R.C.P. 40(c). In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether Eby may be entitled to relief from the order of dismissal pursuant to I.R.C.P. 60(b). We conclude that, in rare instances, such relief may be available under I.R.C.P. 60(b)(6) and we remand this case to the district court for a determination whether Eby is entitled to such relief.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Charboneau v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. GuzmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Carroll v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Alisha Ann Murphy v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Printcraft Press, Inc. v. Sunnyside Park Utilities, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Agrisource, Inc. v. JohnsonIdaho Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Boise Mode, LLC v. Donahoe Pace & Partners Ltd.Idaho Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Profits Plus Capital Management, LLC v. PodestaIdaho Supreme Court · 2014

36 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