In Re Millsap

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that compliance with the five day period of Idaho Code § 10-1306A is required before a lien will arise
• allowing an 13 exemption in multiple contiguous parcels utilized by the owner as 14 a single parcel
• allowing an 13 exemption in multiple contiguous parcels utilized by the owner as 14 a single parcel
• allowing an 13 exemption in multiple contiguous parcels utilized by the owner as 14 a single parcel
• allowing an 13 exemption in multiple contiguous parcels utilized by the owner as 14 a single parcel
• statutes contain no area 25 restrictions on property claimed for a homestead

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Hopkins v. Cerchione (In Re Cerchione)
  Ninth Circuit· 2009-09-08· cited 47×
• In Re Kline
  D. Idaho· 2005-09-02· cited 24×
• In Re Pich
  D. Idaho· 2000-08-07· cited 9×
• In re Johns
  D. Idaho· 2014-01-07· cited 4×
• In Re Jefferson
  D. New Mexico· 1993-11-30· cited 3×
• In re Dougan
  D. Idaho· 2006-03-29· cited 2×
• In re Thames
  D. Idaho· 2005-06-20· cited 1×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• White v. Stump
  Supreme Court· 1924-11-24· cited 283×
• In Re Montgomery
  W.D. Texas· 1987-12-07· cited 34×
• In Re Mitchell
  W.D. Texas· 1987-11-30· cited 17×
• In Re Tiffany
  D. Idaho· 1989-08-25· cited 11×
• Carey v. Pauline (In Re Pauline)
  Ninth Circuit· 1990-10-25· cited 10×
• Coughanour v. Hoffman's Estate
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1887-02-17· cited 7×
• White v. Stump
  Ninth Circuit· 1922-10-30· cited 2×

Other cases named In Re Millsap

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• In re Millsap
  D. Idaho· 1992-05-15· cited 1×