Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Utah, Volume 35
Utah. Supreme Court, Albert Hagan, John Augustine Marshall, John Maxcy Zane, James A. Williams, George L. Nye, Joseph M. Tanner, John Walcott Thompson, Alonzo Blair Irvine, August B. Edler, William S. Dalton, H. Arnold Rich, Harmel L. Pratt
A. L. Bancroft, 1910 - Law reports, digests, etc
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
action adverse possession agent agreement alleged amount answer appellant applied assignment assumed attorney authority bonds cause charge circumstances claim Comp complaint conclusion condition Constitution contract corporation counsel court crossing damages deceased deed defendant determine direct District duty effect election engine entered error evidence exceptions executed exercise facts finding follows franchise further give given ground held hold injury interest issue Judge judgment jurisdiction jury justice land limited matter ment motion necessary negligence notice objection operation opinion ordinary owner Page paid parties payment person Peterson plaintiff possession presented proceedings purchase question railroad reason received record recover referred refused regard relation respect respondent rule Salt Lake statute street sufficient testified tion track train transfer trial unless Utah witness
Page 269 - We may lay it down as a broad general principle, that, wherever one of two innocent persons must suffer by the acts of a third, he who has enabled such third person to occasion the loss must sustain it.
Page 460 - Every holder is deemed prima facie to be a holder in due course; but when it is shown that the title of any person who has negotiated the instrument was defective, the burden is on the holder to prove that he or some person under whom he claims acquired the title as a holder in due course.
Page 495 - The court shall, in every stage of an action, disregard any error or defect in the pleadings or proceedings which shall not affect the substantial rights of the adverse party, and no judgment shall be reversed or affected by reason of such error or defect.
Page 279 - Ostensible authority is such as a principal, intentionally or by want of ordinary care, causes or allows a third person to believe the agent to possess.
Page 217 - ... any demand which may be established against the defendant by the final judgment of the court. But if there is no appearance of the defendant, and no service of process on him, the case becomes in its essential nature a proceeding in rem, the only effect of which is to subject the property attached to the payment of the demand which the court may find to be due to the plaintiff.
Page 589 - The Legislature shall not pass any laws permitting the leasing or alienation of any franchise, so as to relieve the franchise or property held thereunder from the liabilities of the lessor or grantor, lessee or grantee, contracted or incurred in the operation, use, or enjoyment of such franchise, or any of its privileges.
Page 311 - Franklin circuit court, for $20,000.00 damages for the death of his intestate, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of...
Page 283 - But it is urged that this case falls within the general principle which has become a maxim of law, that when one of two innocent persons must suffer by the acts of a third, he who has enabled such third person to occasion the loss, must sustain it.
Page 43 - There is no presumption in this country that every person knows the law; it would be contrary to common sense and reason, if it were so.
Page 455 - Where a signature is forged or made without the authority of the person whose signature it purports to be, it is wholly inoperative, and no right to retain the instrument, or to give a discharge therefor, or to enforce payment thereof against any party thereto, can be acquired through or under such signature, unless the party against whom it is sought to enforce such right is precluded from setting up the forgery or want of authority.