Legal Opinion · Dissent

Harrington v. Industrial Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1939No. 5969Published

1DissentMoffat, Chief Justice

I cannot concur either in the reasoning or result arrived at in the determination of whether Harrington was engaged in interstate or intrastate commerce. I am willing to admit that according to the tests laid down by the decided cases there is room for difference of opinion. I shall not restate the facts or reasons leading to the conclusion reached by this court in the prevailing opinion reported in 83 P. 2d 270. While other and additional reasons might be given or facts recited such reasons or analysis of facts might be no more convincing than those already stated. To some, the analysis of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. New York Central Railroad Company v. WinfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Erie Railroad Company v. WinfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  3. Harrington v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API