Legal Opinion

Pitzer v. Swenson

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided March 28, 1996No. 21878PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PERRY, Judge.

In this case, we are asked to review the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law following a court trial. Because only two of the district court’s three alternative legal theories for relief were challenged on appeal, we affirm the district court’s award of damages on the unappealed theory.

I

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The parties in this case were involved in a contract regarding the sale and purchase of a 1977 Bayliner boat. Prior to advertising the boat for sale, the sellers, Donald R. and Carol Swenson, were aware of a hole in the deck of the boat. They placed plywood…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Sun Valley Shopping Center, Inc. v. Idaho Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1991
  2. J.R. Simplot Co. v. Chemetics International, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Faw v. GreenwoodIdaho Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Cole v. KunzlerIdaho Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Kawai Farms, Inc. v. LongstreetIdaho Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Andersen v. Professional Escrow Services, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Potlatch Corp. v. United StatesIdaho Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Loveland v. StateIdaho Court of Appeals · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API