(1) In the laying out, alteration, construction, maintenance, repair or improvement of any highway or portion of it, within a county and not included within a highway district in a county which would also be for the benefit of the highway district, or included within a highway district which would also be for the benefit of a portion of the county or other highway districts not included in the highway district, and the cost would, if borne wholly by the highway district or the excluded portion, be an unjust or unreasonable burden, the highway district commissioners and the county commissioners shall have power to contract with each other for a division and apportionment of the cost of the work.
(2)  In case they fail to agree, an action may be maintained in the district court between a highway district and the county, and the district court shall render a judgment as shall be just and equitable in respect to the division and apportionment of cost. All proceedings in the action shall be the same as in ordinary civil actions, with the same right of appeal and other rights and remedies as in an ordinary civil action by or against a body politic or political subdivision.

Terms Used In Idaho Code 40-1315

  • Appeal: A request made after a trial, asking another court (usually the court of appeals) to decide whether the trial was conducted properly. To make such a request is "to appeal" or "to take an appeal." One who appeals is called the appellant.
  • Contract: A legal written agreement that becomes binding when signed.
  • Equitable: Pertaining to civil suits in "equity" rather than in "law." In English legal history, the courts of "law" could order the payment of damages and could afford no other remedy. See damages. A separate court of "equity" could order someone to do something or to cease to do something. See, e.g., injunction. In American jurisprudence, the federal courts have both legal and equitable power, but the distinction is still an important one. For example, a trial by jury is normally available in "law" cases but not in "equity" cases. Source: U.S. Courts
(3)  Where a highway traverses two (2) or more highway districts, and the cost or burden would be inequitably distributed if each district assumed the cost of laying out, alteration, construction, improvement, maintenance or repair of that portion of the highway lying wholly within the district, the highway commissioners of the district affected have power to contract with each other for the division and apportionment of the cost of the work. If the highway also traverses portions of the county not included within any highway district, or if in the opinion of the commissioners the highway is of benefit to the county at large, a portion of the cost shall be borne by the county, and the commissioners and the respective highway district commissioners have power to contract with each other for the work.