Legal Opinion

Holland v. Columbia Iron Mining Co.

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 1956No. 8237PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JONES, District Judge. ' '

"'’ From á summary judgment dismissing the 'corporate1' defendants 'from this action, ap-'pelláírfs bring this' interniediaté"appeal. • ' ■

The six causes of action set out in the amended complaint charge the corporate defendants (respondents) with conspiring with one of the individual defendants, and their alleged participation in and aiding said individual defendant in the fraudulent concealment of the amount being paid him for his one-fourth interest in certain mining claims. The record consists of the depositions of all the individuals who had anything to do with…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Maggio v. ZeitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  2. Reitmeister v. ReitmeisterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
  3. Kenney v. Washington Properties, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1942
  4. Missouri ex rel. De Vault v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939
  5. Neblett v. ElliottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Israel Pagan Estate v. CannonCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1987
  2. Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. Salt Lake County Board of EqualizationUtah Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Brandt v. Springville Banking CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Holland v. MoretonUtah Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Sorenson v. BeersUtah Supreme Court · 1978

8 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