By Lori Fleming

The following is a summary of rule amendments approved by the Idaho Supreme Court between June 2025 and July 2026. Unless otherwise indicated, all amendments were effective July 1, 2026. The orders amending these rules can be found on the Idaho Supreme Court website at https://isc.idaho.gov/rules-procedure/recent-amendments. Be sure to check the Idaho State Bar’s weekly email publication, The Weekly Brief, for your chance to comment on proposed amendments and new rules before they are adopted.

Idaho Appellate Rules

On the recommendation of the Idaho Appellate Rules Advisory Committee, chaired by Chief Justice G. Richard Bevan, the Idaho Supreme Court adopted a number of amendments to the Idaho Appellate Rules. Perhaps the most significant changes for appellate practitioners are the revisions to Rules 34 and 36, governing the length and formatting of appellate briefs. Those revisions, along with the other amendments, are discussed below.

Rule 5. Judgment on attorney fees in original actions. Idaho Appellate Rule 5 governs special writs and original proceedings in the Supreme Court. The rule has been amended to include a new subsection providing that, if the Court awards costs (which may include attorney fees) in connection with an original proceeding, the order will be accompanied by a judgment that may be recorded and enforced in the trial courts in the same manner as any other money judgment.

NEW Rule 6.1. Consolidation. This new rule allows the Court, on its own motion or on the motion of a party, to consolidate two or more appeals for any or all purposes, including preparation of the record and transcripts, briefing, oral argument, and issuance of an opinion.

Rule 11. Appealable orders and judgments. Idaho Appellate Rule 11 identifies the district court and administrative agency orders and judgments that are appealable to the Supreme Court as a matter of right. Subsection (a)(7) of the rule, addressing orders made after final judgment civil actions, has been amended in two respects. First, the amended rule excludes orders setting aside or vacating a judgment from the post-judgment orders that are appealable as a matter of right. Second, it clarifies that, if the judgment is a partial judgment that has been certified as final under Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the only post-judgment orders that may be appealed are those that relate to or arise from the Rule 54(b) judgment.

Subsection (f) of Rule 11, which addresses appeals from decisions on judicial review of agency actions, has also been amended. Previously, the rule broadly allowed appeals “[f]rom any final decision or order of the district court on judicial review of an agency decision.” The amendment replaces that language with two, more specific categories of appealable orders: (1) a final judgment as defined by Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 54(a); and (2) any order entered after final judgment, except an order granting a petition for rehearing. The change aligns the appellate rule with Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 84, which requires entry of a judgment in judicial review proceedings.

NEW Rule 11.3. Transfer of appeal taken to wrong court. This new rule establishes procedures for transferring appeals from magistrate court judgments when they are taken to the wrong court. Most magistrate court judgments must be appealed to the district court. However, if the magistrate court judgment is one that grants or denies a petition for termination of parental rights or a petition for adoption, the appeal from that judgment must be taken directly to the Supreme Court. See I.A.R. 11.1(a). Under New Rule 11.3, if a party files a timely notice of appeal to the Supreme Court from a magistrate court judgment or order that is not appealable to the Supreme Court under Rule 11.1(a), the Court may transfer the appeal to the district court, and the appeal will thereafter proceed as though it were originally taken to the district court. Conversely, if a party files a timely notice of appeal to the district court from a magistrate court judgment or order that must be appealed to the Supreme Court under Rule 11.1(a), the district court clerk must forward the notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court may order the appeal transferred. If the Court orders a transfer, the appeal will thereafter proceed as though it were originally taken to the Supreme Court.

Rule 13. Stay of proceedings on appeal. The amendments to Idaho Appellate Rule 13 primarily clarify and reorganize the rules governing stays pending appeal and the authority retained by the district court and Supreme Court during an appeal. Most significantly, the amendments add express standards for obtaining a stay of a non-money judgment or injunction. Under amended Rule 13(b)(8) and (14), a district court may grant a stay—either on motion of a party or on its own motion—only if the applicant demonstrates both a likelihood of success on the merits of the appeal and a likelihood of irreparable harm absent a stay. Similar standards were added to Rule 13(g), governing stays issued by the Idaho Supreme Court. The amendments now expressly distinguish between stays of non-money judgments and stays of money judgments, with the latter continuing to be governed by the supersedeas bond provisions in Rule 13(b)(15). In addition, new subsections in Rule 13(g) separately address the criteria for stays, conditions of stays, and the effect of Supreme Court stay orders.

Rule 17. Technical amendment. The amendment to Rule 17(h), governing transcript requests on appeal, modernizes the rule by making electronic transcripts the default format. Previously, if the appellant did not specify a preferred format within 21 days of filing the notice of appeal, the transcript would be provided in hard copy. Under the amended rule, the default is now an electronic copy of the transcript.

Rule 23. Filing fees and waiver. This rule has been amended to streamline the process for obtaining a waiver of appellate filing fees. Under the amended rule, an appellant seeking a waiver must file a motion and indigency declaration with the notice of appeal, and the district court or administrative agency must enter an order recommending whether the waiver should be granted. The amendments also eliminate the prior “lodging” procedure in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reviews the waiver request without additional briefing unless otherwise ordered, and if the waiver is denied, the appellant has 21 days to pay the filing fee or the appeal will be dismissed. In addition, the amendments expand automatic filing fee waivers to parties represented by specified legal aid and volunteer attorney programs, and they add appeals of vexatious litigant designations under Idaho Court Administrative Rule 59 to the list of appeals exempt from filing fees.

Rule 24. Transcript format and waiver. Rule 24 has been amended to require that transcripts of separate proceedings be prepared in separate volumes in accordance with new Rule 26(a), I.A.R. The amendments also revise the procedure for waiver of reporter’s fees to align with the updated appellate filing fee waiver procedures under Idaho Appellate Rule 23.

Rule 26. Preparation and arrangement of transcripts. This rule has been reorganized and amended to clarify the formatting, arrangement, pagination, and preparation requirements for appellate transcripts. The amendments add a new requirement that each transcribed proceeding be prepared as a separate transcript volume, clarify that binding requirements apply only when a hard copy transcript is requested, and eliminate page limits for hard copy transcripts.

Rule 27. Waiver of Clerk’s Record fee. The amendments to Idaho Appellate Rule 27(e) clarify the procedure for requesting a waiver of the clerk’s record fee. The rule now expressly requires that a request to waive the clerk’s record fee be filed with the notice of appeal and provides that the request will be processed in the same manner as a request to waive the appellate filing fee under Idaho Appellate Rule 23(c) and (d).

Rule 28. Clerk’s or agency’s record and new requirement for electronic transcript record. Idaho Appellate Rule 28 has been amended to add a new requirement that, after all transcripts are lodged, the clerk must compile an electronic transcript record. The rule requires that the transcripts be arranged chronologically by hearing date, that the transcript record contain electronic bookmarks that link to each transcript, and that the transcript record be numbered consecutively at the bottom of each page. The amendments to Rule 28 also remove outdated provisions relating to preparation of paper clerk’s and agency’s records and clarify that, while requested hard copy records must be prepared in volumes containing no more than 200 pages each, the electronic clerk’s or agency’s record must be prepared as a single volume, regardless of the number of pages.

Rule 34. Length of briefs. Idaho Appellate Rules 34 and 36 (discussed below) were amended to significantly alter the preparation and formatting requirements for appellate briefs. Under prior Rule 34, appellate briefs were subject to maximum page limits. As amended, the rule replaces page limits with word-count limits and requires the filing party to certify compliance with the applicable word-count requirement. A party’s first brief is generally limited to 14,000 words and reply briefs are limited to 7,000 words, with expanded limits for capital cases on unitary review. The amendments retain page limits for handwritten prisoner briefs.

Rule 36. Preparation of briefs. Rule 36 was amended to replace outdated formatting requirements designed for paper briefs with updated formatting requirements intended to improve the readability and consistency of electronically prepared briefs. The amendments establish new standards governing page size, spacing, margins, pagination, typeface, and font size. Under the amended rule, briefs generally must use proportionally spaced 14-point Times New Roman or Century Schoolbook font with one-inch margins and double-spaced text, although headings, footnotes, and block quotations may be single spaced. The amendments also create separate formatting provisions for typewritten briefs filed by unrepresented parties and for handwritten briefs filed by prisoners.

Idaho Court Administrative Rules

Rule 2. Removal of magistrate judge without cause. Effective July 1, 2025, Idaho Court Administrative Rule 2 was amended to substantially reorganize and modernize the procedures governing the removal of a magistrate judge without cause during the first 18 months after appointment. The amendments clarify that the rule applies to administrative personnel review or removal proceedings, expressly provide that the Idaho Rules of Evidence do not apply, and state that subpoenas are unavailable in proceedings under the rule. The amendments also clarify procedures for personnel review meetings, notice requirements, removal hearings, confidentiality of proceedings and records, issuance and service of removal orders, and the voting requirements for removal by a magistrates commission.

Rule 4. Pro tempore trial judge by agreement. Effective July 1, 2025, Rule 4 was amended to make extensive stylistic and organizational revisions and to clarify procedures governing pro tempore trial judges. The amendments clarify that appointment of a pro tempore judge is subject to the discretion and approval of the administrative district judge, specify procedures for reassignment or removal of a pro tempore judge, and clarify the scope of a pro tempore judge’s authority. The amendments also add requirements that the parties and pro tempore judge enter into a written compensation agreement and expressly provide that the pro tempore judge serves as an independent contractor rather than a court employee.

Rule 7. Enlargement of cases assignable to magistrate judges. Effective August 1, 2025, Rule 7 was amended primarily to make stylistic and organizational changes. The amendments modernize terminology and clarify that an administrative district judge may enlarge categories of civil or criminal cases assignable to magistrate judges, either district-wide, by county, or as to specific magistrate judges within the judicial district.

Rule 32(c) and (d). Access to exempt court records. Effective August 20, 2025, Rule 32(c) was amended to specifically identify the categories of exempt court records that parties and their attorneys may not access unless permitted by court order. In addition, subsection (d) was amended to clarify that access to court records through the Supreme Court’s case management system is subject to the limitations of that system.

Rule 32(g). Exempt court records. In 2026, Rule 32(g) was amended to include three new categories of exempt records. Effective January 1, 2026, the rule was amended to exempt certain court technology and cybersecurity records, including computer programs, technical and user manuals, and records concerning the nature, location, configuration, or function of cybersecurity devices, programs, and systems used to protect court technology, communications, and data from cyberattacks or unauthorized access. The January 1 amendments also added an exemption for non-case-file court records involving safety or security where disclosure would reasonably jeopardize people or property, including emergency evacuation plans, security plans, courthouse blueprints, vulnerability assessments, security staff work schedules, and similar records. Finally, effective February 5, 2026, the rule was amended to exempt rough or preliminary transcripts of court proceedings generated by automated speech-to-text software.

Rule 32(k). Cost of copying records. Effective August 26, 2025, Rule 32(k)(6) was amended to remove the provision requiring a person requesting a court record in digital form to provide the necessary storage media to the court.

Rule 40. Appellate court records. Effective August 26, 2025, Rule 40 was repealed and replaced with a new, comprehensive rule governing appellate court records. The new rule specifies the contents of appellate case files, establishes retention periods for permanent and non-permanent records, authorizes destruction of paper records after electronic preservation, and requires copies of appellate briefs to be provided to designated law libraries after a case is closed.

Rule 45. Cameras in the courtroom. Effective July 1, 2026, Rule 45 was repealed and replaced with a new rule governing cameras in the courtroom. The new rule establishes procedures and standards for audio and visual coverage of court proceedings, including requirements for advance approval by the presiding judge, limitations on coverage, restrictions on photographing jurors and certain confidential proceedings, rules governing pool camera arrangements, and operational guidelines for photographers and videographers in the courtroom.

Rule 52. Court interpreters. Effective February 5, 2026, Rule 52 was amended to replace references to the “Intro to Court Interpretation class” with “an AOC-approved court interpretation introduction class” in the definitions for certified interpreters, certified master-level interpreters, conditionally approved interpreters, and registered interpreters.

Rule 59. Vexatious litigation. Effective April 23, 2026, subsection (i) of this rule was amended to clarify that a presiding judge’s order granting or denying a vexatious litigant’s request for leave to file new litigation is final.

Rule 101. Persons with neurocognitive disorders, protective custody without a hearing. Effective July 1, 2025, Rule 101 was amended to make both stylistic and substantive changes governing temporary protective custody proceedings involving persons with neurocognitive disorders. Consistent with the 2025 amendments to Idaho Code section 56-1904, the amendments to Rule 101 revise the standard for protective custody by replacing references to a person with a neurocognitive disorder being “likely to injure” themselves or others with language requiring that the person be “imminently dangerous” to themselves or others.

NEW Rule 76. Qualifications of child custody mediators. Effective January 1, 2026, new Idaho Court Administrative Rule 76 establishes statewide qualification standards for child custody mediators. The rule provides that a roster of approved mediators will be compiled and maintained by the Administrative Office of the Courts and establishes the qualifications and training requirements necessary for placement on and continued inclusion on the roster. The rule sets requirements for professional credentials, mediation training, continuing education, and proof of compliance. It also establishes minimum training hours and required instruction in areas such as child custody, family dynamics, domestic violence, mediation ethics, and conflict resolution.

Idaho Criminal Rules

The Idaho Criminal Rules Advisory Committee is chaired by Justice Cynthia K.C. Meyer.

Rule 32. Information in Presentence Investigation Reports (“PSI Reports” or “PSI”). Effective January 15, 2026, Idaho Criminal Rule 32 was amended to make numerous formatting, stylistic, and substantive changes to the rule governing presentence investigations and reports. The substantive amendments include a new provision stating that, if a defendant is committed to the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections (“I.D.J.C.”) under a blended sentence pursuant to Idaho Code section 19-2601A, the PSI Report (1) must be available to the I.D.J.C. while the defendant is committed to or supervised by the I.D.J.C., and (2) may be retained by the I.D.J.C. until the defendant is discharged from commitment or supervision.

The amendments also added a new subsection establishing procedures for correcting PSI Reports. The new provisions require that requests to correct a PSI Report be made by the sentencing hearing, that any court-ordered change be included in an “Order Correcting Presentence Report” attached to the sealed PSI, and that both the order and PSI be served on the Idaho Department of Correction. The amendments also establish procedures for challenging PSI corrections or service issues, requiring such challenges to be raised in the district court within 14 days after entry of judgment to preserve the issue for appeal.

NEW Rule 76A. Removal of child custody mediators from roster. Effective February 3, 2026, new Idaho Court Administrative Rule 76A establishes procedures for investigating complaints against child custody mediators on the Idaho Supreme Court’s roster and for removing mediators from the roster for misconduct or noncompliance. The rule identifies grounds for removal, creates complaint, investigation, and hearing procedures, authorizes interim suspension during investigations, and details reinstatement and confidentiality requirements.

Idaho Juvenile Rules

The Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee is chaired by Judge Victoria Olds.

NEW Rule 4. Juvenile Corrections Act petition. Effective January 1, 2026, new Idaho Juvenile Rule 4 establishes the required form and contents of petitions filed under the Juvenile Corrections Act (“J.C.A.”). The rule requires petitions to be titled “In the interest of [name of juvenile], a juvenile under (eighteen) 18 years of age,” and specifies the information that must be included under oath, including the alleged facts bringing the juvenile within the purview of the J.C.A., identifying information for the juvenile, and the names and residences of parents, guardians, custodians, or nearest relatives. The rule also permits amendment of a petition before the prosecution rests so long as no additional or different offense is charged and the juvenile’s substantial rights are not prejudiced.

Rule 15. Evidentiary hearing (J.C.A.). Effective January 1, 2026, Idaho Juvenile Rule 15 was amended primarily to make stylistic and organizational changes to procedures governing J.C.A. evidentiary hearings. Substantively, the amendments add a new provision expressly allowing the juvenile or the court to move for dismissal after the close of the prosecution’s evidence or all evidence. The new provision states that the court must enter an order of dismissal if the evidence is insufficient to sustain a finding that the juvenile committed acts bringing the juvenile within the purview of the J.C.A. If dismissal is granted, the State may move the court to consider whether the evidence is sufficient to support an included offense.

NEW Rule 17B. Effective January 1, 2026, new Idaho Juvenile Rule 17B establishes detailed procedures governing predisposition inquiries and reports in J.C.A. proceedings. The rule authorizes courts to order a predisposition report and specifies the required contents of the report. The rule also permits the use of evidence-based screening tools and requires recommendations tailored to the juvenile’s rehabilitation and supervision needs. It further provides that the rules of evidence do not apply at disposition hearings, allowing reliable hearsay and other otherwise inadmissible information to be considered.

In addition, Rule 17B establishes procedures governing disclosure and confidentiality of predisposition reports. The rule requires disclosure of the report to the juvenile, parent or guardian, counsel, and prosecutor at least 48 hours before disposition, while also authorizing courts to withhold limited sensitive information under specified circumstances. The rule further designates predisposition reports as sealed court records and strictly limits disclosure to certain agencies, evaluators, victims, treatment court personnel, appellate courts, and other approved third parties under controlled conditions. Violations of the rule are punishable as contempt of court.

Rule 23. Right to bail (J.C.A.). Until recently, Idaho Juvenile Rule 23 broadly stated that there was no right to bail for a juvenile in a J.C.A. proceeding. Effective January 1, 2026, the rule was amended to clarify that there is no right to bail for a juvenile under the age of 18; for persons over the age of 18 who are charged with an offense under the J.C.A., Idaho Criminal Rule 46 applies.

Rule 31. Emergency (pretrial) removal of a child under the Child Protective Act (“C.P.A.”). Effective July 1, 2025, Rule 31 was amended to align emergency removal procedures with new legislation allowing courts to remove an allegedly offending parent or custodian from the home—rather than removing the child—through an “order to prevent removal.” The rule previously referred to removal of either a child or an alleged offender. As amended, it now focuses only on removal of the child and identifies the four procedures by which a child may be removed before adjudication. References to pretrial removal of an alleged offender were deleted because those procedures are now governed

Rule 32. Notice of emergency removal (C.P.A.). Effective July 1, 2025, Idaho Juvenile Rule 32 was amended to revise the notice requirements following an emergency removal. The amendments removed the provision requiring notice when an alleged offender is removed from the home and also revised the Appendix A notice form by deleting references to alleged offender removal and updating advisements regarding the right to counsel.

Rule 33. Summons (C.P.A.). Effective July 1, 2025, Rule 33 was amended to incorporate the new statutory “order to prevent removal” procedure into the summons process. The rule now expressly references the “Order to Prevent Removal,” and the revised Appendix A summons form includes new language advising parties that the court may exclude an alleged offending parent, legal guardian, or custodian from the child’s residence, prohibit their contact with the child, and impose distance restrictions pending further order of the court.

New Rule 34A. Effective July 1, 2025, the Supreme Court adopted new Idaho Juvenile Rule 34A, which establishes the procedural framework for obtaining and enforcing an Order to Prevent Removal. Consistent with 2025 House Bill 129, the rule authorizes a prosecutor or the attorney general to seek an order excluding an allegedly offending parent, legal guardian, or custodian from the residence when there is reasonable cause to believe the child can safely remain with another parent or custodian. The rule governs affidavits, ex parte proceedings, after-hours applications, electronic signatures, service requirements, and hearings to continue the order. It also adopts a new standardized Order to Prevent Removal form, which is included in Appendix A to the Idaho Juvenile Rules.

Rule 40. Effective July 1, 2025, Idaho Juvenile Rule 40 was amended to make several stylistic and organizational changes regarding notice and participation rights in C.P.A. proceedings. The amendments clarify that foster parents, preadoptive parents, and relatives providing care for a child in the custody of the Department of Health and Welfare must receive notice of, and an opportunity to be heard at, hearings concerning the child, while also clarifying that those individuals are not parties to the proceeding.

The amendments also revise provisions governing participation by children and youth. The rule now clarifies procedures for participation in writing by children age eight and older, including filing and service requirements, and confirms that the child’s written statement must be considered by the court. The amendments further clarify that youth age twelve and older must attend review and permanency hearings unless excused under specified circumstances.

Additional amendments update notice procedures, clarify that the Department is responsible for providing and confirming notice to the court, and make various wording and terminology changes throughout the rule.

Rule 45. Review hearings (C.P.A.). Effective July 1, 2025, Idaho Juvenile Rule 45 was amended to make organizational, wording, and clarification changes concerning review hearings in C.P.A. proceedings. Substantively, the amendments clarify that the court must hold a review hearing within six months after entry of the court’s order taking jurisdiction and every two months thereafter. In addition, the amendments revise the provisions governing combined review and permanency hearings by requiring the Department and guardian ad litem to file reports no later than five days before hearings required by Idaho Code section 16-1622(1)(a).

NEW Rule 48A. Consent to termination of parent child relationship (C.P.A.). Effective July 1, 2025, the Idaho Supreme Court adopted new Idaho Juvenile Rule 48A governing consent to termination of the parent-child relationship in C.P.A. proceedings. The new rule allows a parent to voluntarily consent to termination of parental rights when the Department of Health and Welfare has filed a termination petition involving a child in the Department’s legal custody. The rule establishes requirements for the form of consent, specifies how in-state and out-of-state consents must be witnessed or authenticated, and provides that a hearing on the termination petition is not required if a signed consent has been filed.

Rule 59. Transition to successful adulthood plan and extended foster care (C.P.A.). Effective July 1, 2025, Idaho Juvenile Rule 59 was amended to implement 2025 House Bill 245 and to make various stylistic changes throughout the rule. Substantively, the amendments extend the maximum period of extended foster care by allowing foster care to continue until a youth’s twenty-third birthday, rather than the youth’s twenty-first birthday as previously provided by the rule.

Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure

The Civil Rules Advisory Committee is chaired by Justice Robyn Brody.

Rule 10.1. Automatic waiver of filing fee. Effective April 23, 2026, the automatic filing fee waiver provision of this rule was amended to remove the reference to the Concordia University School of Law Housing Clinic and to clarify that automatic fee waivers remain available for parties represented through specified legal aid and volunteer attorney programs.

Rule 77. Class actions – disposition of residual funds. Effective January 1, 2026, this rule was amended to add a new provision governing the disposition of residual funds in class action cases. The new provision defines “residual funds” as money remaining after payment of approved class claims, expenses, litigation costs, attorney fees, and other court-approved disbursements, or funds that cannot feasibly or economically be distributed to class members. It further provides that, unless otherwise directed by statute or jointly requested by the parties, residual class action funds must be disbursed to the Idaho Law Foundation to support legal services and access to justice programs for low-income Idaho residents.

Idaho Rules for Electronic Filing and Service

Rule 5. Exceptions to electronic filing. Effective July 1, 2025, Rule 5 of the Idaho Rules for Electronic Filing and Service was amended to add “orders to prevent removal” under new Idaho Juvenile Rule 34A to the list of documents that may be conventionally filed after hours, on weekends, or on holidays because of the emergency nature of those proceedings.

Rule 9. Electronic signatures. Also effective July 1, 2025, Rule 9 was amended to authorize alternative electronic signature procedures for emergency juvenile orders to prevent removal issued after hours, on weekends, or on holidays. The amendments also modernize and clarify provisions governing electronic signatures, signature blocks, and retention of conventionally signed originals.

Idaho Rules of Family Law Procedure

The Children and Families in the Courts Committee is chaired by Judge Diane Walker.

Rule 110. Substitution of attorney. Effective January 1, 2026, Rule 110 was amended to clarify that the rule governing substitution of attorneys applies only when one licensed attorney is replacing another licensed attorney.

Rule 120. Student loan proceeds as potential income under Idaho Child Support Guidelines. Effective July 1, 2025, Rule 120(e)(3) was amended to allow courts to count student loan proceeds as potential monthly income only if those proceeds are actually distributed to the parent-student and are used for expenses other than education.

Rule 509. Joint Preliminary Order and discretionary orders. Effective January 1, 2026, Rule 509 was amended to reorganize and simplify the rule governing preliminary and discretionary orders in family law actions. The amendments rename the rule, expressly authorize courts to issue a joint preliminary order in the form approved by the Idaho Supreme Court, and permit courts to issue additional discretionary orders when justice requires.

Rule 602. Mediation of child custody and visitation disputes. Effective January 1, 2026, Rule 602 was amended to reorganize and expand the procedures governing mediation of child custody and parenting time disputes. The amendments clarify that all family law actions involving disputes over custody or parenting time of a minor child are subject to mediation by a mediator qualified under newly adopted Idaho Court Administrative Rule 76. The rule also now expressly distinguishes child custody mediation under Rule 602 from mediation of other family law matters under Rule 603.

The amendments significantly revise the mediation referral and selection process. Rather than requiring mediation whenever the court finds it in the child’s best interests, the amended rule gives courts broader discretion to order mediation in several circumstances, including on motion of a party, at a Rule 701 conference, upon request for trial setting, or on the court’s own initiative after notice to the parties. The amendments also establish a procedure for selecting mediators, giving parties 28 days to agree on a mediator before the court appoints one from the statewide roster maintained by the Administrative Office of the Courts.

The rule further adds new procedural requirements governing mediation sessions, mediator compensation, confidentiality, reporting, and mediator duties. Among other changes, the amendments require the initial mediation session to be scheduled within 14 days after selection or appointment of the mediator; require mediators to explain the mediation process, confidentiality rules, costs, and the role of independent legal counsel; require agreements reached during mediation to be reduced to writing; and require mediators to submit periodic status reports and a final report to the court.

In addition, the amendments remove the mediator qualification provisions from Rule 602 and relocate them to newly adopted Idaho Court Administrative Rule 76, which creates statewide standards for approval, training, continuing education, and roster maintenance for child custody mediators.

Rule 706. Taking testimony. Effective January 1, 2026, Rule 706 was amended primarily to make stylistic and organizational changes to the rule governing the taking of testimony. Substantively, the amendments expressly authorize the court to permit testimony in open court through the use of video conferencing.

Idaho Rules for Treatment Courts

Rules 19 and 20. Order stopping participant fees on graduation or neutral discharge from treatment court. Effective June 3, 2025, these rules were amended to provide that, upon a treatment court participant’s graduation or neutral discharge from treatment court, the treatment court judge will enter an “Order Stopping Participant Fees.”