Legal Opinion

Carrier v. Pro-Tech Restoration

Utah Supreme Court

Decided August 8, 1997No. 960118PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ON CERTIORARI TO THE UTAH COURT OF APPEARS

ZIMMERMAN, Chief Justice:

Defendant Pro-Tech Restoration (“Pro-Tech”) seeks review of the court of appeals’ decision ordering a new trial because the trial court had incorrectly determined that Pro-Tech and defendant William Smith had sufficiently disparate interests to warrant separate allocations of peremptory challenges under rule 47 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure. See Carrier v. Pro-Tech Restoration, 909 P.2d 271 (Ct.App.1995); cert. granted, 920 P.2d 1194 (Utah 1996). Pro-Tech argues that the court of appeals applied the wrong standard of…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. State v. PenaUtah Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Hopt v. UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  3. State v. MenziesUtah Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State v. BishopUtah Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Scharf v. BMG Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1985

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Bailey v. BaylesUtah Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State v. ThomasUtah Supreme Court · 1998
  3. MacRis & Associates, Inc. v. Neways, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2000
  4. State v. KillpackUtah Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Gallivan v. WalkerUtah Supreme Court · 2002

22 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