Court Opinion

ID: 9633768
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:59:14.467401+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:07.863046
License: Public Domain

BISTLINE, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
I concur fully with the majority opinion except for the part in which the district court’s denial of the Wolters’ attorney fees is affirmed. The Wolters should be granted attorney fees under I.C. § 12-120(3). This Court in Griggs v. Nash, 116 Idaho 228, 234-35, 775 P.2d 120, 126-27 (1989), upheld a district court award of attorney fees to the prevailing party in a legal malpractice action pursuant to the “commercial transaction” provision of I.C. § 12-120(3).