Idaho Law Blog

Don’t Put Your Children on Your Checking Account

Published on: November 21, 2016 | by Racine Olson

I’ve come to understand that my estate planning clients are always well-meaning, but often make mistakes in their estate planning simply because they don’t understand the legal effect of their actions. One of the areas that I find is often a concern is when an older parent puts a child’s name as a co-owner on their banking accounts.

Typically this occurs when a person is getting older and they are concerned about their ability to continue paying their bills and doing the financial things that they would normally do with their bank accounts. In this circumstance this older adult will often name one of their adult children as a co-owner on their bank accounts so the child can sign checks for bills and the like. Their reasoning is that by doing this they are assured that their bills will get paid and all of their financial obligations will continue to be met. The problem is, the legal effect of naming a child on your bank account is way different than what you may understand.

Single-Vehicle Crash on Eastbound I-184 in Ada County, Franklin Exit

Published on: November 21, 2016 | by Racine Olson

The Idaho State Police (ISP) report that a single-vehicle crash caused injuries to a 21 year-old driver on November 16, 2016 at approximately 3:30 p.m. The accident happened near the Franklin Road exit in Ada County.

A female from Kuna, who was driving a 2005 Toyota Scion, left the lane of travel while taking the exit, struck the left barrier, and then struck the right barrier. Her vehicle stopped in the lane of travel.

The 21year-old driver, who was wearing her seat belt, was taken to St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise by ambulance. The Franklin Road exit was blocked for about 30 minutes following the accident. The crash is still under investigation by the ISP.

Your Treating Physician Can Gut Your Idaho Workers’ Compensation Claim

Published on: November 21, 2016 | by Racine Olson

By Fred Lewis

In Fairchild v. Kentucky Fried Chicken, 159 Idaho 208 (2015), on November 13, 2004 16 year old Terence Fairchild was employed by Kentucky Fried Chicken as a cook. He was carrying garbage to a dumpster when he slipped on ice and fell, striking his knees on a concrete barrier. He sought medical care for his knee injury and finally ended up in the office of Dr. Simms, an orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Simms diagnosed Terence with a posterior cruciate ligament injury to his right knee. He did not believe that surgery was needed and gave the claimant a 3% whole person impairment rating. The independent medical evaluator hired by the workers’ compensation insurance company opined that Terence’s right knee was stable and he sustained no permanent partial impairment. In 2011, Terence’s lawyer sent him to another physician to conduct another impairment rating. This new physician gave the claimant a 7% whole person impairment rating. None of the doctors gave the claimant any type of physical restrictions.

The Idaho Industrial Commission found that Terence was not a credible witness based on observations during the hearing and the differences between his hearing testimony and his prior statements during depositions, interviews, and appointments with medical providers. The Commission entered an order awarding the 3% whole person impairment rating with no disability in excess of the impairment rating since there were no restrictions.

Is an Employer Liable for the Actions of Its Employees?

Published on: November 21, 2016 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

My employer clients often ask me if they can be held liable for injuries or damages caused by their employees while they are working. Whenever I begin discussing this question with my clients I always like to start with a scene from the movie, Joe Somebody. Here is the scene:

JEREMY I’m gone for three days and employees are fighting like schoolkids in the parking lot. This McKinney, I know everybody hates that big jerk. But this Joe “Shepherd”

Can an Employer Be Liable for the Misrepresentations of its Employees?

Published on: November 19, 2016 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

Misrepresentation is just another word for fraud. Misrepresentation, either intentional or through negligence simply means there was a failure to communicate. This section will first define the types of misrepresentation that exist in Idaho and will then discuss the basic elements of agency law, which is required for liability to rest on the employer.

There are two basic kinds of misrepresentation: intentional and negligent. Intentional misrepresentation is where a person essentially, knowingly tells a lie. Negligent misrepresentation occurs when a person either simply doesn’t bother to learn first whether the things they are saying are true or they believe something to be true that isn’t and they then represent these things to others. They aren’t intentionally deceiving anyone but what they are saying isn’t true.

Statutory Limitations: Disciplining Employees for Off-Duty Misconduct

Published on: November 17, 2016 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

Scene from the movie Judge Dredd:

PROSECUTOR: The D.N.A. is a perfect match for Judge Joseph Dredd.

Sentencing Held for Fatal DUI Crash in Canyon County District Court

Published on: November 17, 2016 | by Racine Olson

Jeffery Hiscox, a 19 year-old from Boise was killed in August when the vehicle in which he was a passenger was struck by a drunk driver, Orion Blumenfeld of Nampa. Blumenfeld hit the vehicle when its driver was attempting to turn onto Locust Lane. Hiscox was taken to St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center where he died.

The ruling by Third Judicial District Judge Meienhofer includes 180 days of jail time of which 170 days are suspended, two years of supervised probation, $500 fine and suspension of his driver’s license for 180 days. Additionally, Blumenfeld cannot refuse a breathalyzer test, have any illegal substances or new crimes, given 50 hours of community service and must not consume alcohol in the next two years.

In 2015, the Idaho State Police made 1,089 arrests for DUIs, local agencies made 6,298 arrests for a total of 7,387 DUI arrests. The highest percentages of arrests were those in the 24 year-old to 29 year-old age range. 87 fatalities occurred in 2015 from drunk or impaired driving crashes. The Office of Highway Safety and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration remind motorists to drive sober. If you have been drinking, leave your car parked and find an alternative method of transportation to arrive home safely and to protect other motorists.

Infectious Disease Claims are Tough

Published on: November 17, 2016 | by Racine Olson

By Fred J. Lewis

On October 8, 2012, Richard Job, M.D. was working as an internal medicine doctor and primary care physician for DRNE Clinic/Heritage Health. On June 17, 2013 Dr. Job presented to Dr. Patrick Mullen complaining of sudden onset right thumb pain. Eventually, the infection was determined to be caused by methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA. When asked as to a possible source of the infection, Dr. Job told Dr. Mullen that the only thing that came to mind was that his cat had scratched him on his right hand a few weeks previous. The infection spread throughout the claimant’s body.

The widely disseminated MRSA infection had by the time of the hearing resulted in numerous surgeries including multiple hand and wrist, surgeries to clean out the infection, multiple surgeries to Dr. Job’s back and shoulder, and the removal of Dr. Job’s previously installed artificial hip joint. Dr. Job was placed on IV antibiotics for suppressive therapy of his incurable MRSA infection and will remain so for the rest of his life. Dr. Job also had suffered two strokes that were arguably related to his MRSA infection. Strokes left him unable to effectively communicate. In fact, Dr. Job was not even able to attend the hearing in the matter due to his health condition, including a second stroke. But, through his attorney Steven Nemec, Dr. Job had hired a number of physicians to testify in his behalf.

ESPA Ground Water Management Area

Published on: November 15, 2016 | by Racine Olson

By T.J. Budge

The Director of the Idaho Department of Water Resources recently issued an Order Designating the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Ground Water Management Area (“ESPA GWMA”) on November 2, 2016. The Director said his objective in forming the ESPA GWMA is to “bring all of the water users into the fold – cities, water districts and others – who may be affecting aquifer levels through their consumptive use.” (IDWR Press Release No. 2016-18.)

The formation of the ESPA GWMA comes on the heels of the monumental ESPA Settlement Agreement between the Surface Water Coalition (SWC) and Idaho Ground Water Appropriators, Inc. (IGWA). That Agreement resolved more than a decade of contentious litigation between surface water and groundwater users by requiring groundwater users to reduce their water use in order to achieve an agreed-upon aquifer recovery goal for the ESPA. However, about ten percent of the groundwater users who divert water from the ESPA are not represented by IGWA and are not participating in recovering the ESPA. The designation of the ESPA GWMA is designed to require these outliers to contribute toward efforts to recover the aquifer.

Homestead Allowance in Second Marriages

Published on: November 15, 2016 | by Racine Olson

In second marriages, when one or both spouses have children from a previous marriage, it is common for husband or wife to draft their estate planning documents in a way to ensure that their children from the previous marriage will inherit. One way to accomplish this desire is to devise all community property to the new spouse and all separate property to the children from the previous marriage. However, if this is not done properly, the surviving spouse may be able to swoop in under the homestead allowance and take the separate property that was meant to go to the deceased spouse’s children from the previous marriage.

Idaho Code § 15-2-402 states that:

“The homestead allowance is exempt from and has priority over all claims against the estate…The homestead allowance is in addition to any share passing to the surviving spouse…by the will of the decedent unless otherwise provided in the will, or by intestate succession, or by way of elective share. The amount of the homestead allowance shall be fifty thousand dollars ($50,000)…The right to a homestead allowance is determined as follows: