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 1912–2023 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Sandtgreen1 sentence2003Co. v. Sandt, 854 P.2d 519, 521 (Utah 1993) (setting forth our rule requiring this court to construe insurance policy language "liberally in favor of the insured and their beneficiaries so as to promote and not defeat the purposes of insurance" (quotations and citations omitted)). 111 Our conclusion does not, however, necessarily resolve the question of whether the Estate's claim is limited by the Survival Statute. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re Harding Trust
green
2 sentences2023We therefore reject the Estate’s challenge to the amount of this portion of the damages award. 20200808-CA 66 2023 UT App 81 In re Harding Trust repairs to the home out of her own pocket. 2023In addition, we remand the question of the Estate’s entitlement to attorney fees. ¶156 Accordingly, we vacate the judgment entered by the trial court, and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion; those proceedings should, among other things, involve evaluation of Robert’s potential claim for constructive trust against the Estate, reassessment of the amount of interest the Estate is owed, clarification of the judgment, and reassessment of the Estate’s claim for attorney fees incurred in connection with its successful claim for unpaid interest. 20200808-CA 73 2023 U | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Shipp v. Peterson
neutral
2 sentences2021In its order dismissing the complaint in favor of arbitration of P&S’s and the Estate’s claim to the insurance proceeds, the district court explicitly stated, 20190203-CA 9 2021 UT App 25 Shipp v. Peterson All of the claims brought in [the relevant] causes of action on behalf of the [Estate] or P&S GROUP, LLC relate to Defendant Shipp’s conduct as manager of P&S and/or are premised on the assertion that the proceeds of the insurance policy belong to P&S. Thus, such claims are disputes arising under or related to the Operating Agreement. 2021In its order dismissing the complaint in favor of arbitration of P&S’s and the Estate’s claim to the insurance proceeds, the district court explicitly stated, 20190203-CA 9 2021 UT App 25 Shipp v. Peterson All of the claims brought in [the relevant] causes of action on behalf of the [Estate] or P&S GROUP, LLC relate to Defendant Shipp’s conduct as manager of P&S and/or are premised on the assertion that the proceeds of the insurance policy belong to P&S. Thus, such claims are disputes arising under or related to the Operating Agreement. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Calsert v. Flores
green
1 sentence2020After granting the Estate’s motion to dismiss, the district court denied the motion to amend as moot. (continued…) 20181061-CA 14 2020 UT App 102 Calsert v. Flores When evaluating the Estate’s motion to dismiss, the district court was required to accept those allegations as true. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
First Interstate Financial v. Savage
green
2 sentences2020LLC v. Savage, 2020 UT App 1, ¶ 15 , 458 P.3d 1161 . 2020LLC v. Savage, 2020 UT App 1, ¶ 15 , 458 P.3d 1161 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Wiley v. Santa Rosa Bank
neutral
2 sentences1912In Visalia Savings Bk. v. Curtis, 135 Cal. at page 352, 67 Piara, at page 330, the Supreme Court of California held, under a statute precisely like ours, that a lien claimant has “two modes in which he may enforce its payment.” The court further said in that case: “The proceeding under section 1500 (which is the same as our section 3858, supra) is entirely independent of the administration of the estate, and may he conducted in a different forum from that in which said administration is pending, and may be taken after the presentation and allowance of his claim, or even after its rejection.” I 1912In Visalia Savings Bk. v. Curtis, 135 Cal. at page 352, 67 Piara, at page 330, the Supreme Court of California held, under a statute precisely like ours, that a lien claimant has “two modes in which he may enforce its payment.” The court further said in that case: “The proceeding under section 1500 (which is the same as our section 3858, supra) is entirely independent of the administration of the estate, and may he conducted in a different forum from that in which said administration is pending, and may be taken after the presentation and allowance of his claim, or even after its rejection.” I | 1 | 1912–1912 |
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.