Broberg v. Hess
Court of Appeals of Utah
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
2Per curiam
Plaintiff appeals from a jury’s verdict of no cause of action, claiming the trial court’s refusal to ask prospective jurors about their connections with defendants’ insurer was reversible error. We initially concluded that the issues on appeal could be considered and decided without the necessity of a written opinion and, therefore, scheduled the matter for hearing under R.Utah Ct.App. 31. After hearing the arguments of counsel on the merits, we determined that we should issue a written decision to clarify our disposition of the appeal. See R.Utah Ct.App. 31(f).
Martin I.…
3Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. TillmanUtah Supreme Court · 1987
- Balle v. SmithUtah Supreme Court · 1932
- State v. MotonUtah Supreme Court · 1988
- Saltas v. AffleckUtah Supreme Court · 1940
- Hornsby v. Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day SaintsCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by17 opinions
- State v. DeanUtah Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1993
- State v. MeadUtah Supreme Court · 2001
- Badger v. Brooklyn Canal CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1998
- Barrett v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1993
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.