Finholt v. Cresto

29 Citing cases

  1. Teurlings v. Mallory E. Larson Nka Mallory E. Martinez

    320 P.3d 1224 (Idaho 2014)   Cited 13 times
    Applying Idaho Code § 6-904

    Only a “slight doubt as to the facts is not sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact,” but if “reasonable people could reach different conclusions or inferences from the evidence, the motion must be denied.” Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 896–97, 155 P.3d 695, 697–98 (2007). On appeal from summary judgment, this Court exercises “free review over interpreting a statute's meaning and applying the facts to the law.”

  2. Teurlings v. Larson

    156 Idaho 65 (Idaho 2014)   Cited 2 times

    Only a "slight doubt as to the facts is not sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact," but if "reasonable people could reach different conclusions or inferences from the evidence, the motion must be denied." Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 896–97, 155 P.3d 695, 697–98 (2007). On appeal from summary judgment, this Court exercises "free review over interpreting a statute's meaning and applying the facts to the law."

  3. Wright v. Ada Cnty.

    160 Idaho 491 (Idaho 2016)   Cited 11 times
    Holding that Idaho's Whistleblower Act provided the duty for the wrongfully terminated employee's NIED count

    The burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact rests at all times with the party moving for summary judgment. Finholt v. Cresto , 143 Idaho 894, 896, 155 P.3d 695, 697 (2007). This Court must construe the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, drawing all reasonable inferences in that party's favor.

  4. Van v. Portneuf Medical Center

    147 Idaho 552 (Idaho 2009)   Cited 92 times
    Holding that the IPPEA only protects communications related to an existing violation, not a future one.

    The burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact rests at all times with the party moving for summary judgment. Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 896, 155 P.3d 695, 697 (2007). This Court must construe the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, drawing all reasonable inferences in that party's favor.

  5. Axelrod v. Reid Ltd. P'ship

    551 P.3d 777 (Idaho 2024)

    On the issue of summary judgment, we find adequate argument in Reid’s brief to support our review. [12–14] In reviewing a district court’s ruling on a motion for summary judgment, we recognize that "[t]he burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact" rests with the moving party and "[w]e construe the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion[.]" Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 896, 155 P.3d 695, 697 (2007). "However, the nonmoving party must submit more than just conclusory assertions that an issue of material fact exists to withstand summary judgment."

  6. Axelrod v. Reid Ltd. P'ship

    No. 49628 (Idaho Apr. 17, 2024)

    In reviewing a district court's ruling on a motion for summary judgment, we recognize that "[t]he burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact" rests with the moving party and "[w]e construe the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion[.]" Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 896, 155 P.3d 695, 697 (2007). "However, the nonmoving party must submit more than just conclusory assertions that an issue of material fact exists to withstand summary judgment."

  7. Atkinson v. 2M Co.

    164 Idaho 577 (Idaho 2019)   Cited 6 times

    The "going and coming" rule states that an employee is not within the course and scope of his employment on his way to and from work. Finholt v. Cresto , 143 Idaho 894, 898, 155 P.3d 695, 699 (2007) (citing Ridgway v. Combined Ins. Companies of America , 98 Idaho 410, 411, 565 P.2d 1367, 1368 (1977) ). As a result, an employee traveling to and from work is usually not covered by worker's compensation protection unless an exception applies.

  8. Nava v. Rivas-Del Toro

    151 Idaho 853 (Idaho 2011)   Cited 9 times

    Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, “an employer is liable in tort for the tortious conduct of an employee committed within the scope of employment.” Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 897, 155 P.3d 695, 698 (2007). Scope of employment “refers to those acts which are so closely connected with what the servant is employed to do, and so fairly and reasonably incidental to it, that they may be regarded as methods, even though quite improper ones, of carrying out the objectives of the employment.”

  9. Mendenhall v. Aldous

    146 Idaho 434 (Idaho 2008)   Cited 17 times
    Asserting that Mendenhall failed to comply with Idaho's Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act as an affirmative defense

    A mere scintilla of evidence or only slight doubt is not sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 897, 155 P.3d 695, 698 (2007). The nonmoving party must submit more than conclusory assertions that an issue of material fact exists to withstand summary judgment.

  10. Glaze v. Deffenbaugh

    144 Idaho 829 (Idaho 2007)   Cited 22 times
    In Glaze, two sisters brought battery claims against their father for offensive sexual acts that occurred 25 years prior to their filing suit.

    This Court construes the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, drawing all reasonable inferences in that party's favor. Finholt v. Cresto, 143 Idaho 894, 896, 155 P.3d 695, 697 (2007). If there is no genuine issue of material fact, this Court exercises free review over the remaining questions of law. Mannos, 143 Idaho at 931, 155 P.3d at 1170.