Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Breeden v. Edmenson

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided September 14, 1984No. 14469Published

1Concurrence

BURNETT, Judge,

specially concurring.

I agree with the ultimate conclusion that the judgment must be vacated and the case remanded. Rather than joining in the court’s entire opinion, I reach this result upon the narrow ground that the magistrate failed, in his findings of fact and conclusions of law, to distinguish clearly between insuring the vendor’s interest and insuring the vendee’s interest. This distinction is crucial to understanding the issues in the case. The magistrate’s failure to articulate and to apply this distinction has produced ambiguity in his findings of fact concerning…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lynch v. LynchIdaho Supreme Court · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API