Legal Opinion

Kemp v. Murray

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1984No. 18493PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OAKS, Justice:

This is an action by a participant in a joint venture, referred to here as a part nership, 1 to recover damages suffered when defendants thwarted the purchase and development of property by the partnership. Neither the partnership nor plaintiffs partner was named as a party. The trial court dismissed the action, holding that plaintiff had failed to join an indispensable party. Utah R.Civ.P. 19(a). We affirm. 2

In early 1978, plaintiff discovered a parcel of real property in Washington County, Utah, that he believed had excellent potential for development. After ascertaining that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Nordling v. JohnstonOregon Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Stevens v. St. Joseph's HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  3. St. Pierre v. EdmondsUtah Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Shaw v. JeppsonUtah Supreme Court · 1952
  5. White v. JacksonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1969

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Ditty v. Checkrite, Ltd., Inc.District Court, D. Utah · 1997
  2. Landes v. Capital City BankUtah Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Bonneville Tower Condominium Management Committee v. Thompson Michie Associates, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Cottonwood Mall Co. v. SineUtah Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Call v. City of West JordanCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1990

16 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