Legal Opinion

Boll v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 2004No. 29295PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KIDWELL, Justice.

This case is an appeal from a jury verdict, finding no breach of contract by an insurance company and a district court’s subsequent application of the “common fund” doctrine to award the Appellants attorney fees for collection expenses in securing repayment of an insurance company’s subrogation interest. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

I

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On April 12, 1996, the Appellants, Hans and Peggy Boll (the Bolls) were involved in an automobile accident in Idaho Falls, Idaho. The Bolls were insured by the Respondent, State Farm Mutual…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Sun Valley Shopping Center, Inc. v. Idaho Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Cheney v. Palos Verdes Investment Corp.Idaho Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Burgess v. Salmon River Canal Co., Ltd.Idaho Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Reed v. ReedIdaho Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Watson v. Navistar International Transportation Corp.Idaho Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Losser v. BradstreetIdaho Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Weinstein v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Hurtado v. LAND O'LAKES, INC.Idaho Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Seiniger Law Office, P.A. v. North Pacific InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 2008
  5. VFP VC v. Dakota Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 2005

6 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