Frantz v. Hansen
Utah Supreme Court
1Concurrence
LARSON, Justice.
I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice MOFFAT. In view of what is said by the CHIEF JUSTICE, I wish to add, that I consider the rule that cross-assignments should be considered as something different from a cross-appeal, as an archaism which long since outlived its usefulness. When a case is appealed to this court it should be here for examination upon any and all assignments of error attacking the judgment, made by either party. The requirement of the routine and ritual of a “cross-appeal” is more suggestive of ancient religion than modern jurisprudence.
However, the rule as…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Bledsoe v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Mathewson v. CampbellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914
- Sweetser v. PachecoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Kerley v. WetherellIdaho Supreme Court · 1939
- Lumm v. SimpsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1935
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.