Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Nelson v. Jacobsen

Utah Supreme Court

Decided August 31, 1983No. 17667Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDurham, Justice

I join in the reversal of this judgment, but dissent from Part II of the majority *1223opinion because I believe that the cause of action for alienation of affections should be abolished. It is an anachronistic holdover from a bygone era which modern rationalizations have failed to justify. The majority opinion identifies and addresses in turn six arguments presented by the appellant for abolition of the cause of action. Although the majority opinion rejects each of the appellant’s arguments separately, it fails to set forth any affirmative reasons in policy or precedent for the retention of this…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Tinker v. ColwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  2. Wyman v. WallaceWashington Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Bunnell v. BillsUtah Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Tjas v. ProctorUtah Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Clow v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894

16 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