(DOWNLOAD) "William D. Straley v. Idaho Nuclear" by Supreme Court of Idaho No. 11000 * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: William D. Straley v. Idaho Nuclear
- Author : Supreme Court of Idaho No. 11000
- Release Date : January 03, 1972
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 64 KB
Description
This appeal resulted from an order granting summary judgment in favor of the Idaho Nuclear Corporation, hereinafter referred
to as respondent, against William D. Straley, hereinafter referred to as appellant. Appellant had instituted this action to
recover damages for personal injuries sustained while riding in one of respondent's buses. The primary issue for Disposition
on appeal is whether the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of respondent. For reasons articulated
below, we conclude that the district court erred, and that the case must be reversed and remanded for trial. Prior to examining the facts, it is helpful to reiterate the pertinent general principles on summary judgments and this court's
guidelines in determining the propriety of an order granting summary judgment issued by the district court. Summary judgment
is properly granted when "the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that
there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law."
I.R.C.P. Rule 56(c). E.g. Bryan and Co. v. Kieckbusch, 94 Idaho 116, 482 P.2d 91 (1971). In determining whether any issue
of material fact is in dispute, it is well settled that the facts should be liberally construed in favor of the party against
whom summary judgment is sought. E.g. Jack v. Fillmore, 85 Idaho 36, 375 P.2d 321 (1962); Crane v. Banner, 93 Idaho 69, 455
P.2d 313 (1969). In light of this rule, this court has held that summary judgment is improper when a conflict in affidavits
respecting issues of fact exists, or when the relevant pleadings, depositions and affidavits raise any question of credibility
of witnesses. See respectively Hansen v. Howard O. Miller, Inc., 93 Idaho 314, 460 P.2d 739 (1969); Merrill v. Duffy Reed
Construction Co., 82 Idaho 410, 353 P.2d 657 (1960). On the other hand, a mere scintilla of evidence will not create a genuine
issue of material fact sufficient to preclude summary judgment. E.g. Jephson v. Ambuel, 93 Idaho 790, 473 P.2d 932 (1970);
Petricevich v. Salmon River Canal Co., 92 Idaho 865, 452 P.2d 362 (1969) (rejecting the "slightest doubt" test.). On appeal
from an order granting summary judgment, this court must construe the evidence presented to the district court liberally in
favor of the party opposing the order and accord him "the benefit of all inferences which might be reasonably drawn." Rawlings
v. Layne & Bowler Pump Co., 93 Idaho 496, 465 P.2d 107 (1970).
 "William D. Straley v. Idaho Nuclear" by Supreme Court of Idaho No. 11000 * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}