Blackmarr v. City Court of Salt Lake City

Utah Supreme Court

Blackmarr v. City Court of Salt Lake City

46 P.2d 1118, 86 Utah 569, 1935 Utah LEXIS 137

CourtUtah Supreme Court

DecidedJune 14, 1935

DocketNo. 5025.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 46 P.2d 1118 (Blackmarr v. City Court of Salt Lake City) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blackmarr v. City Court of Salt Lake City, 46 P.2d 1118, 86 Utah 569, 1935 Utah LEXIS 137 (Utah 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By a divided court an opinion has heretofore been written and published in this cause. Blackmarr v. City Court of Salt Lake City et al., 86 U. 541, 38 P. (2d) 725. Thereafter a rehearing was granted, and the cause was again orally argued. At the oral argument the case of Spencer v. Court of Honor, 120 Minn. 422, 139 N. W. 815, was cited. The statute involved in the cited case is identical with the statute in the instant case. The Constitution of Minnesota provides that “In all cases when a general law can be made applicable no special law shall be enacted,” etc. Article 4, § 33. The conclusions reached by the Supreme Court of Minnesota in that case are in harmony with the conclusions reached by a majority of this court in the former opinion. After a re-examination of the cause, Mr. Chief Justice ELIAS HANSEN, *570 Mr. Justice FOLLAND, and Mr. Justice EPHRAIM HANSON adhere to the views expressed in the former opinion. Mr. Justice MOFFAT adheres to the views expressed in his dissenting opinion. Judge ALLEN G. THURMAN of the Third District Court, who participated in the second hearing because of the disqualification of Mr. Justice WOLFE, concurs in the views expressed by Mr. Justice MOFFAT in his former dissenting opinion.

It is ordered that the opinion heretofore written and published in this cause stand as the opinion herein.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

By a divided court an opinion has heretofore been written and published in this cause. Blackmarr v. City Court of Salt Lake City et al., 86 U. 541, 38 P. (2d) 725. Thereafter a rehearing was granted, and the cause was again orally argued. At the oral argument the case of Spencer v. Court of Honor, 120 Minn. 422, 139 N. W. 815, was cited. The statute involved in the cited case is identical with the statute in the instant case. The Constitution of Minnesota provides that “In all cases when a general law can be made applicable no special law shall be enacted,” etc. Article 4, § 33. The conclusions reached by the Supreme Court of Minnesota in that case are in harmony with the conclusions reached by a majority of this court in the former opinion. After a re-examination of the cause, Mr. Chief Justice ELIAS HANSEN, *570 Mr. Justice FOLLAND, and Mr. Justice EPHRAIM HANSON adhere to the views expressed in the former opinion. Mr. Justice MOFFAT adheres to the views expressed in his dissenting opinion. Judge ALLEN G. THURMAN of the Third District Court, who participated in the second hearing because of the disqualification of Mr. Justice WOLFE, concurs in the views expressed by Mr. Justice MOFFAT in his former dissenting opinion.

It is ordered that the opinion heretofore written and published in this cause stand as the opinion herein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 P.2d 1118, 86 Utah 569, 1935 Utah LEXIS 137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blackmarr-v-city-court-of-salt-lake-city-utah-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack