HAYES v. KINGSTON

No. 29815.

96 P.3d 652 (2004)

140 Idaho 551

Scott HAYES, Scott Worthen, Sharla Worthen, Steve Ryals, Tom Morgan, Sue Allison and Tom Laws, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. David O. KINGSTON, Defendant-Appellant, and Collabware Corporation, an Idaho corporation, William J. Inman, an individual, Barry L. Moyer, an individual, and Michael J. Lightfoot, an individual, Defendants. William J. Inman, Cross-Claimant, v. Collabware Corporation, an Idaho corporation, David O. Kingston, an individual, Barry L. Moyer, an individual, and Michael J. Lightfoot, an individual, Cross-Defendants. David O. Kingston, both individually and derivatively on behalf of CollabWare Corporation, Cross-Claimant, v. Collabware Corporation, an Idaho corporation, William J. Inman, an individual, and Barry L. Moyer, an individual, Cross-Defendants. David O. Kingston, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Michael J. Lightfoot, an individual, Michael J. Lightfoot, P.C., Gary Blume, an individual, and Blume Law Firm, P.C., Third-Party Defendants. Barry L. Moyer, Cross-Claimant, v. Collabware Corporation, an Idaho corporation, William J. Inman, an individual, David O. Kingston, an individual, and Michael J. Lightfoot, an individual, Cross-Defendants. Gary Blume, an individual, and Blume Law Firm, P.C., Cross-Claimants, v. Michael J. Lightfoot, an individual, and Michael J. Lightfoot, P.C., Cross-Defendants. Gary Blume, an individual, and Blume Law Firm, P.C., Counterclaimants, v. David O. Kingston, an individual, and Collabwar Corporation, an Idaho corporation, Counterdefendants.

Supreme Court of Idaho, Boise, May 2004 Term.

August 9, 2004.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Hawley, Troxell, Ennis & Hawley, Boise, for appellant. Eugene A. Ritti argued.

Cosho, Humphrey, Greener & Welsh, Boise, for respondents. Daniel L. Glynn argued.


BURDICK, Justice.

In this permissive appeal, pursuant to I.A.R. 12(c), David O. Kingston appeals from the district court's denial of his motion to change venue from Ada County, where the plaintiffs allege the fraudulent representations which form the basis of the action took place, to Bonneville County, where the corporation has its principal place of business, some of the defendants reside and, according to Kingston, where the plaintiffs suffered a loss.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases