Legal Opinion

Keller v. Chournos

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 28, 1938No. 5918PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOFFAT, Justice.

When this cause was argued, counsel for both parties suggested that, notwithstanding they knew the court always reads the record, they felt impressed to venture the suggestion that, in their opinion, it would be found interesting and valuable. The record has been carefully read. This was done before consideration of the assignments of error or the motion to dismiss the appeal was examined. We thus have the merits of the cause and the evidence upon the whole problem as submitted to the trial court in mind. Without stating the reasons therefor, appellant would have had much…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tooele Improvement Co. v. HoffmanUtah Supreme Court · 1914
  2. State v. BartholomewUtah Supreme Court · 1934

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Woodmont, Inc. v. DanielsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1961
  2. Chournos v. Evona Inv. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Keller v. ChournosUtah Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Woodmont, Inc. v. S. DanielsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API