Legal Opinion

Hopkins v. Ogden City

Utah Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1888PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of tbe district court of tbe first district, and from an order refusing a new trial. Tbe facts appear in tbe opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Zane, C. J.:

Tbis action was instituted by tbe respondents to recover damages suffered by tbem in consequence of tbe alleged negligence of tbe appellant. Tbe evidence was submitted to a jury, wbo returned a verdict for tbe respondents in tbe sum of $59. Tbe appellant entered a motion for a new trial, wbicb tbe court overruled, and then judgment was entered on tbe verdict. Tbe denial of tbe motion for a new trial tbe apjiellant assigns for error. Tbe appellant insists tbat tbe verdict was unauthorized by tbe evidence.

It appears, from tbe evidence, tbat tbe plaintiffs’ borse, while being driven…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. DeBry v. NobleUtah Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Short & Randall v. PierceUtah Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Tucker v. Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Baumgarten v. HoffmanUtah Supreme Court · 1893
  5. DeBry v. NobleUtah Supreme Court · 1995

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API