Legal Opinion

Salt Lake City v. Revene

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1942No. 6330PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOLFE, Justice.

Appeal from the District Court to determine the validity <of a Salt Lake City ordinance.

Defendant, Andrew Revene, was charged with the violation of a city ordinance on May 18, 1937. There is no dispute as to the facts of this case. The defendant, operator of a barbershop at 266 East 2nd South Street in Salt Lake City, Utah, remained open for the purpose of barbering after the hours for closing designated by the city ordinance.

The lower court sustained a demurrer to the complaint, and plaintiff appeals.

The pertinent sections of the ordinance in dispute read as-follows:

“Section…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Patton v. City of BellinghamWashington Supreme Court · 1934
  2. City of Alexandria v. HallSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1930
  3. State Ex Rel. Newman v. City of LaramieWyoming Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Salt Lake City v. SutterUtah Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Wadsworth v. Santaquin CityUtah Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Redwood Gym v. Salt Lake County CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Call v. City of West JordanUtah Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Nance v. Mayflower Tavern, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Ritholz v. City of Salt LakeUtah Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Nasfell v. Ogden CityUtah Supreme Court · 1952

18 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