Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Zuniga v. Evans

Utah Supreme Court

Decided August 13, 1935No. 5459Published

1Concurrence

FOLLAND, Justice.

I concur. The decision disapproves a statement in a previous decision of this court in Smith v. Edwards, 81 Utah 244, 17 P. (2d) 264, 267, to the effect that “to allege that a person is ‘insolvent’ is alleging a pure conclusion,” and holds that an allegation of insolvency is the allegation of an ultimate fact and is a sufficient allegation of insolvency without the allegation of the probative facts. Because of this holding, I desire to add the following observations and citation of authority: Such an allegation is sufficient in this kind of case, and this view, I think, is…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Sill v. Kentucky Coal & Timber Development Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1916
  2. Smith v. EdwardsUtah Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Utseth v. Pratt-Mallory Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1929
  4. Coal City Coal & Coke Co. v. Hazard Powder Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  5. Rohr v. StantonMontana Supreme Court · 1927

3 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