Legal Opinion

Conway v. Clinton

Utah Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1875Published

Appeal from the Third District Court. The facts necessary to explain the-decision of the caso, appear in the Opinion.

1Dissent 1

Dissenting Opinion.

2Dissent · BoremanBoreman, J.

In the opinion just read, it is held that the Court below committed four errors, for which its judgment should be reversed.

Two of the errors have reference to challenges to jurymen Crowell and Lowe. The challenge of Lowe was not in my opinion good, and the Court committed no error in overruling it. The juryman had no opinion, and not such opinion as he or any one would act upon in the usual affairs of life. People v. Reynolds, 16 Cal. 128. The other challenge (the one to Crowell) may be good. But if we consider both of these challenges good, yet the Defendants waived all…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Lisle v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1840
  3. Hensley v. TartarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  4. Fremont v. SealsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API