Salt Lake City Corporation v. Salt Lake County
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
TUCKETT, Justice:
The plaintiffs filed these proceedings in the district court seeking a declaration that Salt Lake County has the obligation to pay for legal counsel assigned by the city courts to represent persons charged with violations of city ordinances. The district court granted the defendant’s motion for a summary judgment and ruled in effect that the County had no obligation to finance the cost of providing counsel to indigent misdemeanants who were charged with the violation of city ordinances.
Plaintiffs are here seeking a reversal claiming that Sections 17-5-55 and 77-64-1, Utah…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Argersinger v. HamlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Hortencio v. FillisUtah Supreme Court · 1970
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of St. George v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1992
- City of St. George v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1991
- Scott v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Scott v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979