Legal Opinion

Rodriguez v. Oakley Valley Stone, Inc.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided August 6, 1991No. 18600PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOYLE, Justice.

In this appeal from a judgment of the district court quieting title to mining properties in respondent Lionel Rodriguez (designated plaintiff-intervenor in the district court), we are called upon to determine whether respondent was properly allowed into the action as a party plaintiff in an adverse claim procedure initiated under 30 U.S.C. §§ 29, 30 by a third party, Idaho Quartzite Corporation (designated plaintiff in the district court). Because the record is unclear on the preliminary procedural question of whether substitution under I.R.C.P. 25(c) or intervention under one…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Herbert J. Roberts v. Norman M. Ross, JrCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965
  2. Compton v. GilmoreIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Charles Alfred Gaines v. Dixie Carriers, Inc. v. Plotkin, Sapir & Bradley, Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
  4. Matheson v. HarrisIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Peltier v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Fox v. Mountain West Electric, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2002
  2. American Falls Reservoir District No. 2 v. Idaho Department of Water ResourcesIdaho Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Benninger v. DerifieldIdaho Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Idaho Department of Health & Welfare v. DoeIdaho Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Western Community Insurance v. Kickers, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2002

15 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