Skip to main content

Ross v. Ross

Citations

  • 178 P.3d 639
  • 145 Idaho 274
  • 2007 Ida. App. LEXIS 97

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding prejudgment interest for unjust-enrichment claim was discretionary because claim required consideration of not just value of services but also “how much it would be inequitable for [defendant] to retain without reimbursing [plaintiff]”
  • “[A] person who could not determine the amount owed should not be charged interest on the sum that is ultimately found to be due.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lansing, Perry, Gutierrez

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

Other cases with this name

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.