Fred W. Wolf Co. v. Salt Lake City Brewing Co.

Utah Supreme Court

Fred W. Wolf Co. v. Salt Lake City Brewing Co.

37 P. 262, 10 Utah 179, 1894 Utah LEXIS 25

CourtUtah Supreme Court

DecidedJune 13, 1894

DocketNo. 457

StatusPublished

This text of 37 P. 262 (Fred W. Wolf Co. v. Salt Lake City Brewing Co.) 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

Fred W. Wolf Co. v. Salt Lake City Brewing Co., 37 P. 262, 10 Utah 179, 1894 Utah LEXIS 25 (Utah 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

MeREITt, C. JV:

The appellant’s only point for setting aside the verdict and for reversal of the judgment in this case is that the verdict of the jury was concurred in by only nine of the jurors. The record presents only this question: “ Can nine concurring jurors render a verdict?” The legislature ■of Utah, on March 10, 1892, amended the jury law, and provided that “ in all civil cases a verdict may be rendered on the concurrence of nine or more members of the jury.” This statute has been held valid by^this court in the case of Hess v. White, 33 Pac. 243, and also by this court, at its present term, in the cases of Publishing Co. v. Fisher, ante, p. 147 (37 Pac. 259), and Tucker v. Salt Lake City, ante, p. 173 (37 Pac. 261). There being no other error assigned, the judgment of the court below is affirmed.

MiNEE and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

MeREITt, C. JV:

The appellant’s only point for setting aside the verdict and for reversal of the judgment in this case is that the verdict of the jury was concurred in by only nine of the jurors. The record presents only this question: “ Can nine concurring jurors render a verdict?” The legislature ■of Utah, on March 10, 1892, amended the jury law, and provided that “ in all civil cases a verdict may be rendered on the concurrence of nine or more members of the jury.” This statute has been held valid by^this court in the case of Hess v. White, 33 Pac. 243, and also by this court, at its present term, in the cases of Publishing Co. v. Fisher, ante, p. 147 (37 Pac. 259), and Tucker v. Salt Lake City, ante, p. 173 (37 Pac. 261). There being no other error assigned, the judgment of the court below is affirmed.

MiNEE and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 P. 262, 10 Utah 179, 1894 Utah LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fred-w-wolf-co-v-salt-lake-city-brewing-co-utah-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack