Legal Opinion

Hooban v. Unicity International, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided October 8, 2009No. 20080922-CAPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

BENCH, Judge:

11 Defendant Unicity International, Inc. (Unicity) appeals the district court's denial of its request for statutory attorney fees after successfully defending against a contract-based suit brought by Plaintiff Roger Hoo-ban. Because the district court based its denial of statutory attorney fees on an erroneous legal interpretation of the applicable statute, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

BACKGROUND

T2 At a bankruptcy auction, Hooban purchased all outstanding stock in H & H Networking Services, Inc. (H & H), which had previously been wholly owned…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Giusti v. Sterling Wentworth Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Bilanzich v. LonettiUtah Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State v. PetersenUtah Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Anglin v. Contracting Fabrication MacHining, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2001

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Hooban v. Unicity International, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Anderson & Karrenberg v. WarnickCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2012
  3. PC Crane Service, LLC v. McQueen Masonry, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2012
  4. Federated Capital Corp. v. HanerCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2015
  5. Warner v. WarnerCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2014

8 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