Court Opinion

ID: 9844351
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:01:11.545181+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:15:33.136956
License: Public Domain

DUNLAP, District Judge (Ret.),
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent for the reason that there has obviously been no final judgment entered in this case as the issue of attorney fees was specifically reserved by the district court in its partial summary judgment. Because of this fact the partial summary judgment can in no way meet any of the tests of appealability set forth by Idaho Appellate Rule 11. The issue of attorney fees was seriously contested in district court. The allowance or disallowance of attorney fees under Idaho Code § 12-121 requires the exercise of judicial discretion on the part of the trial judge, and according to the record on appeal this was never done.
The allowance or disallowance of attorney fees is an important and serious matter to the litigants involved and in some cases can involve many thousands of dollars. This,-, court should not brush this matter aside as is done by the majority by merely stating without reason or citation of authority that attorney fees are now classified as costs and that therefore the partial summary judgment was indeed a final judgment.
The decision of the majority has the effect of amending I.R.C.P. 54(d)(1) by adding thereto an additional item of costs, that is, attorney fees. Attorney fees are not listed in said rule which was in effect at the time of entry of the partial summary judgment. I can find no precedent for such a decision. Litigants should be able to rely on the rules of procedure of this court in effect at the time of trial.
It is my opinion that this court is without jurisdiction to entertain this appeal and that it should be dismissed.