Wilson v. DeBoard
| Decision Date | 02 March 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 10978,10978 |
| Parties | Betty L. WILSON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Ronald Thomas DeBOARD, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
Thomas Y. Gwilliam, Nampa, and Gary Radke, Caldwell, for defendant-appellant.
Brauner, Fuller & Doolittle, Caldwell, for plaintiff-respondent.
This case presents for question only the validity of an appeal by defendant from the denial of his motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff filed a complaint and defendant answered, alleging that a portion of the statute under which the action was brought violated certain provisions of the Idaho Constitution. Defendant moved for summary judgment, which motion was denied by the trial court. Upon plaintiff's motion, the portion of defendant's answer relating to the alleged unconstitutionality of the statute was stricken. Defendant now seeks to appeal from that denial of his motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff moved to dismiss the appeal as not being from an appealable order. We agree with the contentions of the plaintiff and the appeal will be dismissed.
Article 5, Section 9 of the Constitution of the State of Idaho provides in pertinent part:
'The Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction to review, upon appeal, any decision of the district courts, or the judges thereof * * *.'
Article 5, Section 13 of our Constitution provides in pertinent part:
'The legislature shall have no power to deprive the judicial department of any power or jurisdiction which rightly pertains to it as a coordinate department of the government; but the legislature shall provide a proper system of appeals * * *.' (Emphasis supplied)
Pursuant to the constitutional provisions authorizing such action, the Idaho legislature has enacted I.C. § 1-204:
'Its appellate jurisdiction extends to a review of all cases removed to it under such regulations as are now or may be prescribed by law, from the final decisions of the district courts, or the judges thereof.' (Emphasis supplied)
I.C. § 13-201 explicitly sets forth those orders and judgments from which an appeal may be taken to this court, and an appeal from a denial of motion for summary judgment is not therein authorized.
In State ex rel. State Bd. of Medicine v. Smith, 80 Idaho 267, 269, 328 P.2d 581, 582 (1958), the court stated:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Watson v. Idaho Falls Consol. Hospitals, Inc.
...denying a motion for summary judgment is not a final order, and a direct appeal ordinarily cannot be taken from it. Wilson v. DeBoard, 94 Idaho 562, 494 P.2d 566 (1972). Compare with Bluestone v. Mathewson, 103 Idaho 453, 649 P.2d 1209 (1982). An order denying a motion for summary judgment ......
-
Estate of Spencer, Matter of
...state constitution relating to the right to appeal). Absent a statutory basis for appeal, there is no right to appeal. Wilson v. DeBoard, 94 Idaho 562, 494 P.2d 566 (1972); Miller v. Gooding Highway District, 54 Idaho 154, 30 P.2d 1074 (1934). The Spencers do not state the statutory basis o......
-
Deeds v. Regence Blueshield of Idaho
...administration of justice by the courts of the state. 80 Idaho at 269, 328 P.2d at 581-82 (emphasis added). In Wilson v. DeBoard, 94 Idaho 562, 494 P.2d 566 (1972), this Court held that an appeal could not be taken from an order denying summary judgment because the legislature had not provi......
-
Burgess Farms v. New Hampshire Ins. Group, s. 14803
...will we disturb the ruling of the district court. An order denying a motion for summary judgment is not appealable. Wilson v. DeBoard, 94 Idaho 562, 494 P.2d 566 (1972). The order of the district court is reversed in part. The cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this o......