Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Bagnall v. Suburbia Land Co.

Utah Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1975No. 13753Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

ELLETT, Justice:

(concurring and dissenting) .

I agree with the main opinion in affirming the trial court’s decision to terminate the contract but cannot agree to reverse its ruling as to the United Paint & Colors Company.

When a person sells land to a corporation in process of being formed, the transaction is not complete until the deed is delivered to the corporation after formation. Our court has passed squarely upon this proposition.

In the case of Santaquin Mining Company v. High Roller Mining Company1 a deed was handed to one of the promoters of the corporation. Thereafter the High Roller…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sumter Tobacco Warehouse Co. v. Phoenix Assurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
  2. Santaquin Mining Co. v. High Roller Mining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Beggs v. Myton Canal & Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1919

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API