Two Jinn, Inc. v. Idaho Department of Insurance, 293 P.3d 150

Two Jinn, Inc. (Aladdin/Anytime Bail Bonds) is a licensed Idaho bail agent that contracts with Danielson National Insurance to issue bonds.
Paragraph Three of Two Jinn’s contract indemnifies for the cost of apprehending bail jumpers, which the Department sought to remove.
The Department of Insurance ordered that I.C. § 41-1042 prohibits contemporaneous indemnity against apprehension costs and any post-bond indemnity as a condition of continued validity.
Two Jinn challenged the Final Order in district court, which upheld it; during proceedings, the rule I.D.A.P.A. 18.01.04.016.02 was promulgated to reflect the order.
The Idaho Supreme Court reversed, holding that the plain text of I.C. § 41-1042 allows contemporaneous indemnity and that the Director’s interpretation prejudiced Two Jinn’s rights.
The case is remanded for entry of judgment declaring the statute allows the contemporaneous writing and indemnity contract at issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 41-1042 bars contemporaneous indemnity arrangements.	Two Jinn argues the statute permits contingent indemnity during a bail transaction.	Department contends indemnity for apprehension costs is prohibited within contemporaneous contracts.	Yes; the statute allows such contemporaneous indemnity.
Whether the Director’s interpretation prejudices Two Jinn’s substantial rights.	Two Jinn asserts rights to freely contract during a single transaction.	Director’s interpretation does not unduly burden rights.	Yes; the interpretation prejudices Two Jinn’s substantial rights.

Kuna Boxing Club, Inc. v. Idaho Lottery Comm’n, 149 Idaho 94 (2009) (agency deference and statutory interpretation standards applied)
Elias-Cruz v. Idaho Dep’t of Transp., 153 Idaho 200 (2012) (agency record review under IAPA; standard of review)
Hawkins v. Bonneville Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs, 151 Idaho 228 (2011) (case-by-case assessment of substantial rights under § 67-5279(4))
Manhattan Bldgs., Inc. v. Hurley, 643 P.2d 87 (Kan. 1982) (substantial rights and freedom to contract are recognized)
Nuhome Invs., LLC v. Weller, 81 P.3d 940 (Wyo. 2003) (substantial rights analysis in regulatory challenges)