Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Utah courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Lamb v. Bangartgreen2 sentences1997The law does not permit a covenant of immunity which will protect a person against his own fraud on the ground of public policy.” Id. 1997The law does not permit a covenant of immunity which will protect a person against his own fraud on the ground of public policy." Id. | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Miller v. Celebration Mining Co.
green
2 sentences2017A contract limitation on damages or remedies is valid only in the absence of allegations or proof of fraud.” Lamb v. Bangart, 525 P.2d 602, 608 (Utah 1974). “ ‘If a party’s manifestation of assent is induced by either a fraudulent or a material representation by the other party upon which the recipient is justified in relying, the contract is voidable by the recipient.’ ” Miller v. Celebration Mining Co., 2001 UT 64, ¶ 10 , 29 P.3d 1231 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 164(1) (Am. 2017A contract limitation on damages or remedies is valid only in the absence of allegations or proof of fraud.” Lamb v. Bangart, 525 P.2d 602, 608 (Utah 1974). “ ‘If a party’s manifestation of assent is induced by either a fraudulent or a material representation by the other party upon which the recipient is justified in relying, the contract is voidable by the recipient.’ ” Miller v. Celebration Mining Co., 2001 UT 64, ¶ 10 , 29 P.3d 1231 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 164(1) (Am. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Union Bank v. Swenson
green
1 sentence1994Similarly, in Union Bank v. Swenson, 707 P.2d 663 (Utah 1985), the supreme court again held that fraud is an exception to the parol evidence rule: The parol evidence rule as a principle of contract interpretation has a very narrow application. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Pavia v. Medcalfe
green
2 sentences1981Liu v. Dunnigan, 25 Md.App. 178 , 333 A.2d 338 (1975); Pavia v. Medcalfe, 45 Misc.2d 597 , 257 N.Y.S.2d 447 (1965), aff’d 26 A.D.2d 621 , 272 N.Y.S.2d 716 (1966). 2 Defendants further argue that the restrictive covenant is no longer generally useful because a majority of the landowners in the area joined in the execution of an agreement to modify the covenant. 1981Liu v. Dunnigan, 25 Md.App. 178 , 333 A.2d 338 (1975); Pavia v. Medcalfe, 45 Misc.2d 597 , 257 N.Y.S.2d 447 (1965), aff’d 26 A.D.2d 621 , 272 N.Y.S.2d 716 (1966). 2 Defendants further argue that the restrictive covenant is no longer generally useful because a majority of the landowners in the area joined in the execution of an agreement to modify the covenant. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Ming Kuei Liu v. Dunnigan
green
2 sentences1981Liu v. Dunnigan, 25 Md.App. 178 , 333 A.2d 338 (1975); Pavia v. Medcalfe, 45 Misc.2d 597 , 257 N.Y.S.2d 447 (1965), aff’d 26 A.D.2d 621 , 272 N.Y.S.2d 716 (1966). 2 Defendants further argue that the restrictive covenant is no longer generally useful because a majority of the landowners in the area joined in the execution of an agreement to modify the covenant. 1981Liu v. Dunnigan, 25 Md.App. 178 , 333 A.2d 338 (1975); Pavia v. Medcalfe, 45 Misc.2d 597 , 257 N.Y.S.2d 447 (1965), aff’d 26 A.D.2d 621 , 272 N.Y.S.2d 716 (1966). 2 Defendants further argue that the restrictive covenant is no longer generally useful because a majority of the landowners in the area joined in the execution of an agreement to modify the covenant. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.