Legal Opinion

Julian v. Petersen

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided October 8, 1998No. 971496-CAPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILKINS, Associate Presiding Judge:

Appellants challenge the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to appellee (Lillian Julian). Appellants assert that (i) the alteration of the 1969 deed adding the name of Mrs. Corbridge as an additional grantee did not render the instrument void; and (ii) the alteration and recordation had the effect of conveying partial title to Mrs. Corbridge. We affirm.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Summary judgment is appropriate when there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Utah R. Civ. P. 56(c);…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Higgins v. Salt Lake CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Moelle v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. Mosley v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Baldwin v. BurtonUtah Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Burgess & Co. v. BlakeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Kelly v. Hard Money Funding, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2004
  2. Diocese of San Joaquin v. GunnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  3. Ge Lee v. George Tong LeeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Morris v. Off-Piste Capital LLCCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2018
  5. In re the Estate of HausmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008

2 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