Idaho Supreme Court· 12/21/2006

Country Cove Development, Inc. v. May

Citations

150 P.3d 288
143 Idaho 595
2006 Ida. LEXIS 158

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

stating that a plaintiff must prove \consequent and proximate injury\ to sustain a fraud claim
addressing constructive fraud claims and breach of fiduciary duty claims separately, which suggests they are in fact distinct causes of action
affirming use of parol evidence rule to bar “evidence of a collateral partnership agreement” that would have been needed to establish breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims
“An exception to the general rule exists where a false prediction or opinion is given with the intent to mislead.”
“The issue was not raised before the reply brief and will not be considered”
“[A]pportionment of income derived from transactions involving intangible property as business income may be supported by a finding that the issuer of the intangible property and the taxpayer are engaged in the same trade or business, i.e., the same unitary business[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schroeder, Trout, Eismann, Burdick, Jones

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.