Quick Reference: Idaho Unlawful Detainer at a Glance

For qualifying Idaho eviction cases, the process can move from a three-day notice to a trial setting within twelve days of filing. But that expedited timeline applies only to the narrow category covered by § 6-310(1), not to every residential eviction.

But the notice is where most Idaho cases are won or lost, because Idaho Code § 6-303 and § 6-324 between them require the three-day notice to carry two specific warnings that have nothing to do with the rent demand itself. Omit either and you have a notice that either fails to support the removal or silently forfeits your attorney fees.

This guide covers the five grounds, what the notice must actually say, how service works, the twelve-day track and its scope limits, the jury-trial question the Idaho Supreme Court answered in 2024, the post-judgment removal sequence, and two provisions added in 2024 and 2025 that most published Idaho guidance has not caught up with.

The Five Grounds

Section 6-303 defines unlawful detainer for a tenant of real property for a term less than life.

1. Holding over.
Continuing in possession after the expiration of the term, without the landlord's permission. For a tenancy at will, the tenancy must first be terminated by notice as prescribed in the civil code.

2. Nonpayment of rent.
Continuing in possession after default in payment of rent, where three days' written notice requiring payment, stating the amount which is due, or possession, has been served. Where a subtenant is in actual occupation, the notice must also be served on the subtenant.

3. Breach of other covenants.
Continuing in possession after neglect or failure to perform conditions or covenants other than payment of rent, including a covenant not to assign or sublet, following three days' written notice requiring performance or possession.

4. Assignment, subletting or waste.
A tenant or subtenant who assigns, sublets or commits waste contrary to the lease covenants thereby terminates the lease, and the landlord is entitled to restitution on service of three days' notice to quit.

5. Controlled substances.
Where any person is, or has been, engaged in the unlawful delivery, production or use of a controlled substance on the premises during the term. The terms take their meaning from § 37-2701.

Two features of ground 2 are easy to miss.

• The notice can be late.
  It "may be served at any time within one year after the rent becomes due." A delayed demand does not extinguish the ground.

• Agricultural land has a trap.
  Where a tenant on agricultural land holds over for more than 60 days after the term expires without any demand for possession or notice to quit, the tenant is deemed to be holding by permission, is entitled to hold under the lease terms for another full year, and is not guilty of unlawful detainer during that year.

What the Three-Day Notice Must Actually Say

This is the part that decides cases, and Idaho puts the requirements in two separate places.

Under § 6-303(2), a nonpayment notice must:

• Require payment of the rent, stating the amount which is due, or possession of the property

• Be served on the tenant, and on any subtenant in actual occupation

• Notify the tenant that if a court enters judgment against him, he will have 72 hours, if a residential tenant, and 7 days, or longer if granted by the court, if a commercial tenant or a tenant with a tract of 5 acres or more, to remove his belongings before the landlord may remove and dispose of the property under § 6-316

That third element is a statutory content requirement, not a courtesy. It appears in the definition of the ground itself.

Under § 6-324, if you want your fees:

In any action under the chapter, except where treble damages are awarded, the prevailing party is entitled to an award of attorney fees. But for fees to be awarded in a case requiring the three days' notice under § 6-303(2), the three days' notice must advise the tenant that attorney fees shall be awarded to the prevailing party.

Read that as an operational rule. A nonpayment notice that omits the fee warning does not invalidate the eviction, but it forfeits the fee award in the very case type where fees are most often sought.

Under § 6-303(3), a covenant notice must require performance of such conditions or covenants, or possession. Within three days after service, the tenant, any subtenant in actual occupation, any mortgagee of the term, or other person interested in its continuance may perform the conditions or pay the stipulated rent and thereby save the lease from forfeiture.

There is an important exception in the same subsection: if the covenants and conditions violated cannot afterward be performed, no such notice need be given. Where the breach is not curable by its nature, the cure notice requirement falls away.

Service of the Notice

Section 6-304 sets a three-step hierarchy, and the steps are sequential rather than optional.

1. By delivering a copy to the tenant personally; or

2. If the tenant is absent from both his place of residence and his usual place of business, by leaving a copy with a person of suitable age and discretion at either place, and sending a copy through the mail addressed to the tenant at his residence; or

3. If residence and business cannot be ascertained, or no person of suitable age or discretion can be found there, by affixing a copy in a conspicuous place on the property, and also delivering a copy to a person residing there if one can be found, and also sending a copy through the mail addressed to the tenant at the place where the property is situated

Service on a subtenant may be made in the same manner.

Note that steps 2 and 3 are each compound. Posting alone is not service; posting must be accompanied by delivery to any person residing there and by mailing. Substituted service at a business or residence must be accompanied by mailing. Document which step you used and why the earlier steps were unavailable.

The Twelve-Day Track, and What Disapplies It

Idaho gives certain possession actions an expedited setting, but the fast track is narrower than managers often assume.

Where it applies. Under § 6-310(1), the simplified complaint and expedited track are available in an action exclusively for possession of a tract of land of five acres or less for nonpayment of rent, on controlled substance grounds, or where the tenant is a tenant at sufferance under § 45-1506(11).

What the complaint must state, under § 6-310(1)(a) to (e): a description of the premises with convenient certainty; that the defendant is in possession; that the defendant entered, holds and is in default of rent, or the controlled substance ground; that all notices required by law have been served in the required manner; and that the plaintiff is entitled to possession.

The timetable. Under § 6-310(2), on issuance of the summons the court shall schedule a trial within twelve days from the filing of the complaint, and service of the summons, complaint and notice of trial setting must be not less than five days before the trial date.

The trap. Under § 6-311E, if the plaintiff combines an action for damages with an action for possession, the early trial provision of § 6-310 shall not be applicable. Adding a money claim to the possession complaint takes the case off the twelve-day track and onto the ordinary civil timetable.

For a manager, that is a strategic choice made at the drafting stage: possession quickly, then damages separately, or both together and slowly.

Continuance is tightly limited. Under § 6-311, in those same qualifying actions no continuance may be granted for longer than two days unless the defendant gives an undertaking with good and sufficient security, approved by the court, conditioned on payment of rent that may accrue if judgment goes against the defendant.

Judgment on trial by the court. Under § 6-311A, in the qualifying possession actions, including forcible detainer, the action shall be tried by the court without a jury. If the court finds the complaint true, or judgment is rendered by default, it renders a general judgment for restitution of the premises plus costs and disbursements. If it finds the complaint true only in part, it renders judgment for restitution of that part only.

But that bench-trial language needs a case-law qualification, and it is the single most important point in this article for a contested case.

In Worthington v. Crazy Thunder, 541 P.3d 694 (Idaho 2024), the Idaho Supreme Court held that § 6-311A does not violate the Idaho Constitution, because an unlawful detainer action seeking only possession is equitable, and the Article I, section 7 jury guarantee applies to claims at law rather than in equity.

However, the Court also held the tenant was entitled to a jury trial on her legal claims. Under § 6-313, whenever an issue of fact is presented by the pleadings it must be tried by a jury unless waived. In that case the tenant's affirmative defences raised factual questions about retaliation, whether the § 6-303(2) notice was properly given, and whether the landlords' acceptance of rent waived the right to evict. The Supreme Court affirmed the district court, though on different grounds from the district court's holding that § 6-311A was unconstitutional.

The practical reading for a manager: § 6-311A supports a bench trial where the only question is possession and no factual dispute is raised, but it is not an absolute bar to a jury demand. Affirmative defences that put facts in issue can pull the case out of the expedited bench-trial posture, which is another reason the notice and the rent ledger need to be unimpeachable before filing.

Where you file. Under § 6-305, the district court of the county in which the property, or some part of it, is situated has jurisdiction. In practice these cases are heard in the magistrate division of the district court, with appeal to a district judge, which is the route the parties took in Worthington. Pleadings must be verified under § 6-318.

Judgment, Removal, and the Sequence After Trial

Section 6-316 governs what happens once the landlord wins, and it contains a compound waiting period that is easy to miscount.

• Judgment and forfeiture.
  Under § 6-316(1), judgment is entered for restitution of the premises, and where the proceeding is for unlawful detainer after failure to perform covenants, after default in rent, or on the controlled substance ground, the judgment shall also declare the forfeiture of the lease. The court also assesses damages and finds the amount of rent due.

• A redemption right on larger tracts.
  Where the proceeding is for nonpayment and the tract is larger than five acres and the lease has not expired by its terms, execution shall not issue until five days after entry of judgment, within which the tenant, subtenant, mortgagee or other interested party may pay into court the rent found due with interest, the damages found, and the costs, whereupon the judgment is satisfied and the tenant restored. In all other cases the judgment may be enforced immediately.

• The removal periods.
  Under § 6-316(2), where judgment is for the landlord and possession, a residential tenant has 72 hours to remove belongings; a commercial tenant, or a tenant with a tract of 5 acres or more, has 7 days, and the court may grant a commercial tenant longer on a finding of good cause.

• Then the compound wait.
  Under § 6-316(2), the sheriff restores possession only after both (1) the removal period, 72 hours or 7 days, has expired and (2) three days have passed since the court's finding. Both conditions must be satisfied before the sheriff acts.

• Disposal of what is left.
  Once possession is restored, the landlord or his agents may, subject to any security interests under chapter 9, title 28, remove and dispose of all remaining property, including a motor vehicle removable under § 49-1806, without further compensation to the tenant. On a finding of good cause the court may award the landlord reasonable costs and expenses for removal and restoration.

• The writ.
  Section 6-311C prescribes the form of execution. The landlord or his agents may deliver the writ of restitution, or provide the sheriff with a copy and request that the sheriff deliver it.

Appeal: A 14-Day Automatic Stay, Then the Court Decides

Three sources work together here, and the statutes alone give an incomplete picture.

The rule supplies an automatic stay. Under I.R.C.P. 83(e)(1), the filing of an appeal to the district court automatically stays the proceeding and execution of any judgment or order appealed from by the appellant for a period of 14 days. The rule carves out civil protection orders under Idaho Code §§ 18-7907 and 39-6306, which do not receive the automatic stay.

After that, a stay requires a court order. Under § 6-319, an appeal taken by the defendant does not stay proceedings upon the judgment unless the court so directs. Read with Rule 83(e)(1), the position is that the appellant gets fourteen days automatically and must then obtain an order for anything longer.

And a restitution appeal carries an undertaking. Under § 6-311D, where judgment for restitution is rendered against the defendant, no appeal may be taken by the defendant until he gives, in addition to the ordinary appeal undertaking, a further undertaking with two sureties for payment to the plaintiff, if the judgment is affirmed, of the rental value of the property from commencement of the action until final judgment.

On the deadline to appeal, the time for filing a notice of appeal from the magistrate division is governed by Rule 83 and the applicable appellate rules rather than by Chapter 3. Confirm the current period against the rule before relying on it.

Two Provisions Added in 2024 and 2025

Record shielding, § 6-303A. Added in 2024, this provides that a defendant in an unlawful detainer case under § 6-303 whose case is filed on or after 1 January 2025 will, without filing a petition, have all records of the unlawful detainer shielded from public disclosure if: the entire case was dismissed; no appeal is pending; and at least three years have passed from the day the eviction was filed, or the parties stipulated to shielding and filed the stipulation.

Shielding makes the records unavailable for public viewing, subject to Idaho Supreme Court rules and the capabilities of its record-keeping system. Court staff retain access, and the parties to the case may access shielded records at any time. Any party may separately petition for sealing under Supreme Court administrative rules.

The practical point for screening: a dismissed Idaho eviction may drop out of public view automatically after three years, so the absence of a record is not proof that no case was filed.

Squatter removal, § 6-310A. Added in 2025, this creates a sheriff route that bypasses the court entirely for unauthorised occupants. It is expressly not an eviction remedy, and the conditions make that clear.

A property owner or the owner's authorised agent may request immediate removal only where all of the following hold: the requester is the owner or authorised agent; the property includes a residential dwelling; unauthorised persons unlawfully entered and remain; the property was not open to the public when they entered; the owner has directed them to leave; they are not current or former tenants under any written or oral rental agreement authorised by the owner; they are not immediate family of the owner; and no litigation is pending between the owner and any known unauthorised person.

The request is made by submitting a completed and verified "Complaint to Remove Persons Unlawfully Occupying Residential Real Property" to the sheriff of the county, in substantially the statutory form, which runs to thirteen initialled declarations under penalty of perjury and requires attached identification or evidence of agency authority.

On verification, the sheriff serves a notice to immediately vacate and puts the owner in possession, by hand delivery or by posting on the front door. The sheriff attempts to verify identities and may arrest for trespass or outstanding warrants. The owner may then request the sheriff stand by to keep the peace while the owner changes the locks and removes personal property to or near the property line, at a reasonable hourly rate.

The exposure for getting it wrong is severe. Under § 6-310A(6), a person wrongfully removed may be restored to possession and may recover actual costs and damages, statutory damages equal to triple the fair market rent of the dwelling, court costs and reasonable attorney's fees, and the court shall advance the cause on the calendar.

Note the boundary. Because the procedure is unavailable against a current or former tenant, and because a bad faith use of the forcible detainer route already carries treble damages under § 6-310(5) and § 6-317, a manager should treat § 6-310A as reserved for genuine strangers to the property and route everything involving a rental relationship through § 6-303.

Common Idaho Compliance Mistakes

1. Omitting the belongings warning. Section 6-303(2) requires the nonpayment notice to state the 72-hour or 7-day removal period after judgment.

2. Omitting the attorney fee warning. Under § 6-324, fees are unavailable in a § 6-303(2) case unless the three-day notice advised that fees go to the prevailing party.

3. Not stating the amount due. Section 6-303(2) requires the notice to state the amount which is due.

4. Missing the subtenant. Where a subtenant is in actual occupation, the notice must be served on them as well.

5. Posting without the accompanying steps. Section 6-304's third method requires posting and delivery to a person residing there if one can be found and mailing.

6. Combining damages with possession. Section 6-311E disapplies the twelve-day early trial provision when damages are combined.

7. Assuming the fast track applies to any property. Section 6-310(1) is limited to tracts of five acres or less on the specified grounds.

8. Counting only 72 hours after judgment. Section 6-316(2) requires the removal period and three days after the court's finding before the sheriff restores possession.

9. Disposing of property without checking security interests. Section 6-316(2) makes disposal subject to chapter 9, title 28 interests.

10. Letting an agricultural holdover run past 60 days. Under § 6-303(2) the tenant is then deemed to hold by permission for another full year.

11. Using the § 6-310A sheriff route against a former tenant. The section excludes current and former tenants, and wrongful use carries triple the fair market rent plus fees.

12. Treating a clean public record as proof of no prior eviction. Section 6-303A shields qualifying dismissed cases automatically after three years.

13. Assuming a bench trial is guaranteed. Under § 6-313 and Worthington v. Crazy Thunder, affirmative defences raising issues of fact can support a jury demand.

14. Planning removal on the day of judgment after an appeal is filed. I.R.C.P. 83(e)(1) gives an automatic 14-day stay on filing.

What the File Has to Show

Idaho's timetable is short enough that the file is usually built before the case starts, not after.

• The notice is the document under scrutiny. It has to state the amount due, carry the belongings warning, and carry the fee warning, and you have to be able to show which of the three § 6-304 service methods was used and why. A notice template that has not been checked against both § 6-303(2) and § 6-324 is the most common single point of failure.

• Five days is the real service deadline. With trial set within twelve days of filing and service required at least five days before trial, the working window for service is short and fixed by the court's own scheduling order.

• The post-judgment sequence needs two dates, not one. The removal period and the three days after the finding both have to run before the sheriff acts.

RIOO is a property management platform built directly on NetSuite. Rent ledgers supporting the amount stated in a § 6-303(2) notice sit in Collecting Rent & Payments, lease terms in Contracts & Renewals  and the move-out condition record supporting a damages claim in Move Ins & Move Outs.

Idaho's repair provisions run on a separate track and can surface as a defence or counterclaim. Our guide to Idaho landlord repair obligations and the limits of tenant remedies covers § 6-320, the three-day tenant notice and the treble damages exposure under § 6-317.

Conclusion

Idaho's eviction process is fast for the cases that qualify, and its speed is built into the statute rather than left to local practice. In a § 6-310(1) action the court shall set trial within twelve days, and continuances beyond two days require security.

Two qualifications matter. Section 6-311A provides for a court trial without a jury, but Worthington v. Crazy Thunder confirmed that § 6-313 preserves a jury right on legal claims where the pleadings present issues of fact. And while § 6-319 provides that an appeal does not stay the judgment unless the court directs, I.R.C.P. 83(e)(1) gives an automatic 14-day stay on filing.

What the statute does not do is forgive a defective notice. The three-day notice under § 6-303(2) must state the amount due, must warn of the 72-hour or 7-day removal period, and must advise that attorney fees go to the prevailing party if you intend to claim them. Service must follow the § 6-304 hierarchy, and two of the three methods are compound.

For managers in Boise, Meridian, Nampa, Idaho Falls and Coeur d'Alene, the working sequence is: check the ground against § 6-303; draft the notice against both § 6-303(2) and § 6-324; serve it under § 6-304 and record the method; file for possession only, keeping damages separate if you want the twelve-day setting; diary five days before the trial date for service; and after judgment count both the removal period and the three days before expecting the sheriff.

Last reviewed: August 2026. This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Idaho's forcible entry and unlawful detainer chapter has been amended recently, including § 6-303A in 2024 and § 6-310A in 2025, the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure govern appeals and are amended from time to time, court practice varies by county, and individual circumstances differ. Confirm the current text with the Idaho Legislature and consult a licensed Idaho attorney on a specific notice or filing.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. How much notice is required to evict for nonpayment in Idaho?
Three days' written notice under § 6-303(2), stating the amount which is due, or possession, served on the tenant and on any subtenant in actual occupation.

Q2. What must an Idaho three-day notice contain?
The amount due, and a warning that on judgment the tenant will have 72 hours if residential, or 7 days if commercial or on 5 acres or more, to remove belongings. To claim attorney fees, § 6-324 requires the notice to advise that fees go to the prevailing party.

Q3. Can an Idaho tenant cure a lease violation?
Yes, for breaches under § 6-303(3). Within three days after service the tenant, a subtenant, a mortgagee or another interested person may perform the covenants or pay the rent and save the lease from forfeiture. Where the violated covenant cannot afterward be performed, no such notice is required.

Q4. How quickly does an Idaho eviction reach trial?
Under § 6-310(2) the court shall schedule trial within twelve days of filing, with service at least five days before trial, in an action exclusively for possession of five acres or less on the specified grounds.

Q5. Does adding a damages claim slow the case?
Yes. Under § 6-311E, combining an action for damages with an action for possession disapplies the early trial provision of § 6-310.

Q6. How long after judgment before a tenant is removed in Idaho?
Under § 6-316(2), a residential tenant has 72 hours to remove belongings, and the sheriff restores possession after that period and three days after the court's finding.

Q7. Does an appeal stop an Idaho eviction?
Partly. Under I.R.C.P. 83(e)(1), filing an appeal to the district court automatically stays the proceeding and execution of the judgment or order for 14 days. After that, any further stay must be ordered by the court under § 6-319. In addition, § 6-311D requires a defendant appealing a restitution judgment to give an additional undertaking with two sureties for the rental value pending appeal.

Q8. Are Idaho eviction records public?
Under § 6-303A, for cases filed on or after 1 January 2025, records are shielded automatically without a petition where the entire case was dismissed, no appeal is pending, and three years have passed or the parties stipulated to shielding.

Q9. Can an Idaho landlord have squatters removed by the sheriff?
Section 6-310A, added in 2025, allows an owner or authorised agent to request immediate sheriff removal of unauthorised occupants on a verified statutory complaint, but only where eight conditions are met, including that the occupants are not current or former tenants. Wrongful use carries triple the fair market rent plus costs and fees.

Q10. Is an Idaho eviction tried by a judge or a jury?
Section 6-311A provides for a court trial without a jury in the qualifying possession actions. But in Worthington v. Crazy Thunder (2024) the Idaho Supreme Court held that § 6-311A is constitutional while confirming that under § 6-313 a tenant is entitled to a jury on legal claims where the pleadings present issues of fact, such as retaliation, defective notice or waiver by acceptance of rent.

Q11. Who can be named as a defendant in an Idaho eviction?
Under § 6-308, only the tenant and any subtenant in actual occupation when the notice was served need be named, and a person who becomes a subtenant after service is bound by the judgment.