Wayne “skip” & Kristine Rudd (Idaho 2003)

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the malpractice action because the plaintiffs failed to serve the summons and complaint within the six‑month period required by Rule 4(a)(2) and did not show good cause. The Court also held that the pre‑litigation screening statutes do not toll the service deadline and declined to award attorney fees.

Holding

Do Idaho Code §§ 6‑1005 and 6‑1006 toll the six‑month service period required by Rule 4(a)(2)?. No, the statutes toll only the statute of limitations, not the six‑month period for service of the summons and complaint under Rule 4(a)(2).

Did the plaintiffs show good cause for failing to serve the summons and complaint within six months?. No, the plaintiffs did not show good cause; oral agreements to accept service are insufficient, and their efforts were not diligent.

Is any party entitled to an award of attorney fees on appeal?. No, attorney fees are not awarded because the plaintiffs did not prevail on appeal and the appeal was not frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.

Cited authorities

Rule 4(a)(2) of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure

Rule 4(a)(2)

Rule 5(b) of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure

Rule 5(b)

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by