Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Nichols v. Cherry

Utah Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1900PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Original application in mandamus to compel the third district court to allow a trial by jury after failure of applicant to pay the jury fee as required by the rule of court.

1Opinion of the CourtBartch, C. J.

This is a proceeding in mandamus, original in this court. It appears from the petition that the relator is the plaintiff in the case of George Nichols v. Oregon Short Line Railway Company, which is pending in the district court; that the .action is one at law; that on February 3, 1900, the defendant herein called the same to have it set for trial; that at the time of such setting the plaintiff appeared and in open court orally demanded a jury and paid to the clerk the “sum of $5, the amount of the jury fee required by law;” that the judge of the court then and there refused the demand of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kimball v. Grantsville CityUtah Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Conneau v. GeisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Farwell v. MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Biggs v. LloydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Chasteen v. . MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Linde v. TaylorNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Ingard v. BarkerIdaho Supreme Court · 1915
  3. State v. FairWashington Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Farmer v. LoofbourrowIdaho Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Utah State Building & Loan Ass'n v. PerkinsUtah Supreme Court · 1918

11 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