Legal Opinion

Gates v. Pickett & Nelson Construction Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 18, 1967No. 10035PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPEAR, Justice.

In plaintiff’s third amended complaint, the first in which the Idaho Board of Highway Directors was made a party to the action in addition to Pickett & Nelson Construction Co. as defendants, the theory of, and the basis for, plaintiff’s action is set forth in paragraphs IV and V, as follows:

“IV.
“That the defendants surveyed and relocated the plaintiff’s existing water ditch and hauled in or caused to be hauled in new dirt building a ditch on top of the ground at a higher elevation and installing a small siphon under the new highway and delayed and caused delay in the delivery…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Martha M. Kirk, an Adult, and Kenneth William Kirk, a Minor, Who Sues by His Guardian Ad Litem, Martha M. Kirk v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959
  2. Myers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
  3. Casey v. Nampa and Meridian Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Pigg v. BrockmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Davis v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Smith v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Garrett Freightlines, Inc. v. Bannock Paving Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Black v. Peter Kiewit Sons' Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Craig Johnson Construction, L.L.C. v. Floyd Town Architects, P.A.Idaho Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Mary Pandrea v. Kenneth BarrettIdaho Supreme Court · 2016

14 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