Yost Ex Rel. Yost v. State
Utah Supreme Court
1DissentStewart, Justice
I dissent because I cannot agree with the conclusion that the record and transcript contain “sufficient evidence to establish that appellant was the owner or operator of Chris’s,” nor can I agree to going outside the trial record, as the majority does, in an effort to shore up the only, and, in my view, inadequate, evidence relating to the ownership of the business called Chris’s. In short, I think the record is inadequate to support a judgment against Chris L. Petersen.
It is axiomatic that a plaintiff cannot meet its burden of proof by speculation. Alvarado v. Tucker, 2 Utah 2d 16, 268 P.2d…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Kopfinger v. Grand Central Public MarketCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. GaleenerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1966
- General Insurance Co. of America v. Carnicero Dynasty Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1976
- Adamson Et Ux. v. BrockbankUtah Supreme Court · 1947
- Alvarado v. TuckerUtah Supreme Court · 1954
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.