Legal Opinion

Winn v. Frasher

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 1989No. 17373, 17392 and 17401PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*501JOHNSON, Justice.

This is a personal injury action. The trial court denied a motion for summary judgment of the defendants on the ground that the so-called “fireman’s rule” does not exist in this state. We disagree and reverse and remand.

I

THE UNUSUAL POSTURE OF THIS CASE AND OUR NARROW APPROACH IN THIS OPINION.

This appeal is before us in an unusual posture. The decision of the trial court that is on appeal is a denial of a motion for summary judgment. Ordinarily, this is not an appealable order. However, the trial court certified this case to us as an interlocutory appeal pursuant to I.A.R.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Kreski v. Modern Wholesale Electric Supply Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Salinas v. VierstraIdaho Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Christensen v. MurphyOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Fawcett v. IrbyIdaho Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Pincock v. McCoyIdaho Supreme Court · 1929

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Verska v. Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical CenterIdaho Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Furstein v. HillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
  3. Carson v. HeadrickTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Aardema v. U.S. Dairy Systems, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Bath Excavating & Construction Co. v. WillsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993

40 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