Legal Opinion

Whitney v. Faulkner

Utah Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 2004No. 20020412PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILKINS, Associate Chief Justice:

¶ 1 Defendant Larry Faulkner (“Faulkner”) and his wife, Renee Faulkner (“Renee”), a garnishee, appeal the trial court’s determination that Faulkner’s disclaimer of an interest in a trust was ineffective and that the interest was therefore subject to garnishment. The plaintiffs, David C. Whitney, Whitney Enterprises, Inc., and Con-Blast, Inc. (collectively, “Whitney”), who have an unsatisfied judgment against Faulkner, cross-appeal the trial court’s denial of prejudgment interest on the garnishment amount. We affirm the trial court’s ruling regarding the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. PenaUtah Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Lyon v. BurtonUtah Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Board of Education of the Granite School District v. Salt Lake CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Exxonmobil Corp. v. Utah State Tax CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 2003
  5. In Re the Estate of KirkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1999

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. USA Power, LLC v. PacifiCorpUtah Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Brady v. ParkUtah Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Thompson v. Catlin Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2018
  4. Crowley v. BlackCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2007
  5. Colonial Building Supply, LLC v. Construction Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2011

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