Legal Opinion

Smith v. Jarman

Utah Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1922No. 3775PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFrick, J.

The plaintiff, hereinafter called appellant, commenced this action against the defendants to recover upon a certain *127negotiable promissory note and to foreclose tbe mortgage executed and delivered, as hereinafter stated, to secure tbe payment of said note. Tbe complaint is in the usual form in such actions. Tbe defendant Jarman filed an answer to tbe complaint, alleging part payment of said note to tbe mortgagee, as will hereinafter appear, while all tbe other defendants except bis wife defaulted. Tbe case was tried to tbe court, and it made findings of fact and conclusions of law in favor of…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Carpenter v. LonganSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
  2. Boucofski v. JacobsenUtah Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Borgess Investment Co. v. VetteSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
  4. Wilson v. CampbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Reeves v. HayesIndiana Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. UTAH MORTG. AND LOAN CO. v. BlackUtah Supreme Court · 1980
  2. First National Bank of Salt Lake City v. HaymondUtah Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Nielson v. WestromIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. LynnMontana Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Parker v. Citimortgage, Inc.District Court, D. Utah · 2013

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