Legal Opinion

Cannon v. Oviatt

Utah Supreme Court

Decided March 26, 1974No. 13366, 13379PublishedCited by 55 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CALLISTER, Chief Justice:

The appeals of the plaintiffs, which arose out of separate and unrelated actions, have been consolidated since they involved one common question of law, namely, was Section 41-9-1, U.C.A.1953, unconstitutional? Each plaintiff, while a guest in a motor vehicle, moving upon a public highway in this state, sustained personal injuries in a vehicular accident. Each plaintiff initiated an action against his host, the driver of the vehicle, to recover damages for the negligent operation of the vehicle. Each host asserted Section 41-9-1, U.C.A. 1953, as a defense and denied…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Rowland v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Silver v. SilverSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  4. Brown v. MerloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Klein v. KleinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962

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

3Cited by55 opinions

  1. Manistee Bank & Trust Co. v. McGowanMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Malan v. LewisUtah Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Thompson v. HaganIdaho Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Sidle v. MajorsIndiana Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Gray F. Madison, Sr., and Elizabeth B. Madison, Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs v. Deseret Livestock Company, a Utah CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1978

50 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