Legal Opinion

D. A. Taylor Co. v. Paulson

Utah Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1976No. 14402PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MAUGHAN, Justice:

Plaintiff, a wholesale carpet dealer, initiated this action to recover an indebtedness incurred by defendant, Paulson, for the purchase of carpeting. It was an open account. Defendant, Windsor House, Inc., had executed a promissory note to pay Paulson’s indebtedness; so plaintiff joined it in the action seeking to recover under the note. Windsor House, Inc. defaulted and judgment was entered against it. The issues raised by Paulson, hereinafter referred to as defendant, were tried by the court. Judgment against defendant was awarded to plaintiff in the sum of $1,322.-44, plus…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Davenport v. DicksonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1973
  2. Credit Bureaus Adjustment Department v. Cox Bros.Oregon Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Kennedy Et Ux. v. GriffithUtah Supreme Court · 1939

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wheat Belt Public Power District v. BattermanNebraska Supreme Court · 1990
  2. First American Commerce Co. v. Washington Mutual Savings BankUtah Supreme Court · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API