Legal Opinion · Dissent

Forsey v. Hale

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1963No. 9585Published

1DissentCrockett, Justice

I dissent, adhering to the position and reasoning stated in the prior opinion. 13 Utah 2d 315, 373 P.2d 904. In an effort to make this as clear as possible I add the following:

There are two propositions which I regard as fundamental and inescapable and which should be controlling in this situation :

First, the duty to pay for decedent’s last illness and burial falls primarily upon her estate. This is the law generally and is expressly made so in Utah by our statute.1 Only secondarily is the husband (or anyone else) obliged to pay such charges. It is sound policy to encourage the payment of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Columbia Trust Co. v. AnglumUtah Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Dunn v. WallingfordUtah Supreme Court · 1916
  3. In Re Mower's EstateUtah Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Forsey v. HaleUtah Supreme Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API