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 1942–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
Waddoups v. Amalgamated Sugar Co.green2 sentences2012See Waddoups v. Amalgamated Sugar Co., 2002 UT 69, ¶ 15 , 54 P.3d 1054 (explaining that characterizing the nature of the underlying dispute to determine whether the issue sounds in tort or contract is an important preliminary step in resolving a conflict of laws question because the resulting analysis varies depending upon the type of action involved). 2012See Waddoups v. Amalgamated Sugar Co., 2002 UT 69, ¶ 15 , 54 P.3d 1054 (explaining that characterizing the nature of the underlying dispute to determine whether the issue sounds in tort or contract is an important preliminary step in resolving a conflict of laws question because the resulting analysis varies depending upon the type of action involved). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Morton International, Inc. v. Auditing Division of the Utah State Tax Commission
green
2 sentences1992While the resulting standard of review is the same, each grant is distinct under Morton International, Inc. v. State Tax Commission, 814 P.2d 581 , 588 n. 38 (Utah 1991). 1 In this case, Bhatia does not assert that the commission’s interpretation of “just cause,” as set forth in its administrative rules, is erroneous; instead, he claims his actions simply did not constitute “just cause” for dismissal. 1992While the resulting standard of review is the same, each grant is distinct under Morton International, Inc. v. State Tax Commission, 814 P.2d 581 , 588 n. 38 (Utah 1991). [1] In this case, Bhatia does not assert that the commission's interpretation of "just cause," as set forth in its administrative rules, is erroneous; instead, he claims his actions simply did not constitute "just cause" for dismissal. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Erickson
green
1 sentence1990On appeal, defendant assumes that the contact between the bailiff and the jurors was presumptively prejudicial because it was more than “a brief, incidental contact where only remarks of civility were exchanged.” Erickson, 749 P.2d at 620 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Sampliner v. Motion Picture Patents Co.
green
2 sentences1942This was necessarily a request that the court find the facts, and the parties are, therefore, concluded by the finding made by the court, upon which the resulting instruction of law was given.’ Citing the Beuttell case, the same court in the Williams case said: ‘Where both parties request a peremptory instruction and do nothing more they thereby assume the facts to be undisputed and, in effect, submit to the trial judge the determination of the inferences proper to be drawn therefrom.’ Sampliner v. Motion Picture Patents Co., 254 U. S. 233, 239 , 41 S. Ct. 79 , 65 L. 1942This was necessarily a request that the court find the facts, and the parties are, therefore, concluded by the finding made by the court, upon which the resulting instruction of law was given.’ Citing the Beuttell case, the same court in the Williams case said: ‘Where both parties request a peremptory instruction and do nothing more they thereby assume the facts to be undisputed and, in effect, submit to the trial judge the determination of the inferences proper to be drawn therefrom.’ Sampliner v. Motion Picture Patents Co., 254 U. S. 233, 239 , 41 S. Ct. 79 , 65 L. | 1 | 1942–1942 |
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.