Legal Opinion

Foreman v. Foreman

Utah Supreme Court

Decided January 6, 1947No. 6958PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRATT, Justice.

This matter comes before the Court on the motion of the Attorney General of the State of Utah to dismiss the appeal of L. J. Barclay upon the grounds and for the reason that the contempt sentence was criminal in nature and the State of Utah, the adverse party in such a proceeding, was not served with notice of appeal within the time allowed by law.

The facts which have a bearing on the appeal are these: L. J. Barclay was counsel for Pearl Cooper Foreman in the case of Pearl Cooper Foreman v. Otto C. Foreman. At the conclusion oí the trial, the trial judge ordered that the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lamb v. CramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Davidson v. MunseyUtah Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Snow v. SnowUtah Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Auto Highball Co. v. SibbettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
  5. Utah Power & Light Co. v. Richmond Irr. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1932

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Von Hake v. ThomasUtah Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Peterson v. PetersonUtah Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Holbrook v. HolbrookUtah Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Limb v. LimbUtah Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Hall v. HallUtah Supreme Court · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API