Legal Opinion

Hintze v. Seaich

Utah Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 1968No. 10961PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*277ELLETT, Justice:

The respondents, former employees of the appellant, filed this action to recover wages and commissions claimed to be due them. There are really three separate and distinct cases involved herein, and the discussion will be devoted first to the Hintze claim.

In his original complaint Mr. Hintze claimed that between January, 1959, and April, 1965, he earned commissions and/or wages in the amount of $800 and that the same had not been paid. After the answer was filed, Mr. Hintze amended his complaint and revised his claim upward and demanded $5,000 as the amount due him.

At pretrial…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hudson v. Yonkers Fruit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
  2. Bennett v. Robinson's Medical Mart, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1966

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Sugarhouse Finance Co. v. AndersonUtah Supreme Court · 1980
  2. United American Life Insurance Co. v. Zions First National BankUtah Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Tates, Inc. v. Little America Refining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Cannon v. Stevens School of Business, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Messick v. PHD Trucking Service, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1980

6 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