Brown v. Atkin
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from the Third District Court. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLowe, C. J.
The case was mandamus, and the writ was issued, and the hearing and proceedings were had before the Judge of the Third District Court in vacation, in pursuance of the 592nd Section of the Practice Act. It is assigned for error that there was no jurisdiction in the Judge at Chambers, for the reason that it was not competent for the Legislature to confer this jurisdiction upon the Judge in vacation, fend that the Section referred .to is in violation of Sec. 9 of the Organic Act. I do not think there is any plain incompatibility' between the two. A similar *278Act has been sustained by the Supreme…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McLeod v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Territory ex rel. Eisenmann v. ShearerSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1880