Legal Opinion

Mathis v. Madsen

Utah Supreme Court

Decided October 16, 1953No. 7900PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOLFE, Chief Justice.

Initially this was an action to quiet title to land against the claims of the several defendants who filed separate answers, with defendants Ferrell and Madsen filing separate counterclaims. The respective po^ sitions and allegations of the parties will appear as the facts develop; however, in order to present a true perspective of the cause, a crucial stipulation must be mentioned at the outset. Realizing that the title to the property involved was in a state of confusion, the parties entered into a stipulation for the purpose of clearing title to the property, and…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Jeppi v. Brockman Holding Co.California Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Fraley, Adm'r v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  3. Marion Mortgate Co. v. GrennanSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
  4. Wood v. CasserleighSupreme Court of Colorado · 1902
  5. Toland v. CoreyUtah Supreme Court · 1890

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Ault v. HoldenUtah Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Continental Bank and Trust Company v. BybeeUtah Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Peterson v. CallisterUtah Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Big Butte Ranch, Inc. v. HolmUtah Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Gregerson v. JensenUtah Supreme Court · 1980

13 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