Legal Opinion

Robinett v. Price

Utah Supreme Court

Decided July 22, 1929No. 4814PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStraup, J.

This action was brought to recover, damages alleged to have resulted from the closing and discontinuance of a portion of Tenth street, in Price, Utah. The trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

No point is made that the municipality had not the right to close and discontinue the street. There was a question raised as to whether or not the street was a public street. We think there was sufficient evidence to show the street was a public street, and as to that question the plaintiff was entitled to go to the jury. The principal point, however, presented…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Tilly v. Mitchell & Lewis Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Dantzer v. Indianapolis Union Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Ponischil v. Hoquiam Sash & Door Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Cram v. LaconiaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1901
  5. O'Brien v. Central Iron & Steel Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hendrickson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
  2. State v. HoblittMontana Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Board of County Com'rs v. SlaughterNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Springville Banking Co. v. BurtonUtah Supreme Court · 1960
  5. State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. DanfelserNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963

10 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