Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

W.L. Scott, Inc. v. Madras Aerotech, Inc.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1982No. 13444Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBakes, Chief Justice

I concur in Parts I through IV and Part VI of the majority opinion. I also agree with the majority’s conclusion in Part V of its opinion that there was sufficient evidence before the trial court to support its conclusion that the sale was not made in a commercially reasonable manner. I disagree, however, that the trial court erred by not discounting the total rents in computing the damage award. The majority construes the holding in the case of Industrial Leasing Corp. v. Thomason, 96 Idaho 574, 532 P.2d 916 (1974), too broadly where it states that the rule of law formulated in Thomason…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Graves v. CupicIdaho Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Howard v. Bar Bell Land & Cattle Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Idaho State University v. MitchellIdaho Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Melton v. AmarIdaho Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Industrial Leasing Corporation v. ThomasonIdaho Supreme Court · 1974

8 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