Legal Opinion · Dissent

Staker v. Ainsworth

Utah Supreme Court

Decided January 8, 1990No. 870166Published

1DissentHall, Chief Justice

I dissent based upon the principles of stare decisis and judicial self-restraint, precepts having significant application to the development of law by the courts.1 Appellants have not requested or sought on appeal consideration of our established boundary by acquiescence doctrine or the overruling of Halladay v. Cluff2 and its progeny. Indeed, except for appellees Holmes and Jensen, none of the parties seek the extraordinary involvement in which a majority of the Court endeavors to participate. Further, the issue of the continuing validity and force of the “objective uncertainty” element…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Vasquez v. HillerySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
  5. Arizona v. RumseySupreme Court of the United States · 1984

38 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