Howard v. Town of North Salt Lake

323 P.2d 261, 7 Utah 2d 278, 1958 Utah LEXIS 139
CourtUtah Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 28, 1958
Docket8697
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 323 P.2d 261 (Howard v. Town of North Salt Lake) 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
Howard v. Town of North Salt Lake, 323 P.2d 261, 7 Utah 2d 278, 1958 Utah LEXIS 139 (Utah 1958).

Opinions

WORTHEN, Justice.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the trial court in disconnecting lands belonging to the plaintiffs from the corporate limits of defendant town. The disconnection was made under the provisions of Chapter 4, Title 10, U.C.A.1953. Section 10-4-1, U.C.A.1953 provides:

“Whenever a majority of the real property owners in territory within and lying upon the borders of any incorporated city or town shall file with the clerk of the district court of the county in which such territory lies a petition praying that such territory be disconnected therefrom, and such petition sets forth reasons why such territory should be disconnected from such city or town, and is accompanied with a map or plat of the territory sought to be disconnected, and designates no more than five persons who are empowered to act for such petitioners in such proceedings, the court shall cause a notice of the filing of the same to be served upon said city or town in the same manner as a summons in a civil action, and shall also cause notice to be published for a period of ten days in some newspaper having general circulation in such city or town. Issue shall be joined and the cause tried as provided for the trial of civil causes as nearly as may be. The proper authorities of such city or town, or any person interested in the subject-matter of said petition, may appear and contest the granting of the same.”

Section 10-4-2, U.C.A.1953 provides:

“If the court finds that the petition was signed by a majority of the real property owners of the territory concerned and that the allegations of the petition are true and that justice and equity require that such territory or any part thereof should be disconnected from such city or town, it shall appoint [280]*280three disinterested persons as commissioners to adjust the terms upon which such part shall he so severed as to any liabilities of such city or town that have accrued during- the connection of such part with the corporation, and as to the mutual property rights of the city or town and the territory to be detached.” (Emphasis added.)

The plaintiffs are real property owners whose premises were disconnected from the town by decree of the trial court. They will be referred to herein as “plaintiffs” or “respondents.” The defendant Town of North Salt Lake will be designated as the “Town” or “appellant.”

The Town was organized in 1946. In 19S0 it had a population of some 2SS persons. Its population at the time of trial was estimated at about 1,150 persons. At the time of organization the Town embraced an area of approximately 480 acres which extended along the main highway between Salt Lake City and Ogden and lay on both sides of the tracks of the Union Pacific Railroad and the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad. The southerly boundary line of the Town is northerly boundary line of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County.

On April 21, 1952, the Town enacted an ordinance of annexation whereby there was added to the Town over 3,440 acres or an area seven times the area of the Town when organized. The real property concerned in this action was all included in the property annexed on April 21, 1952. Certain real property adjacent to and immediately west of the original Town belonging to Cudahy Packing Company, Salt Lake Stock Yards, Hercules Powder Company and Atlas Powder Company, was excluded. The excluded territory is completely surrounded by the Town as constituted following the April 21, 1952 annexation, and will be referred to herein and on the photograph of Exhibit 2 herein as the Island. This exclusion left the properties of Hercules and Atlas Powder Companies outside the Town whereas the properties of Illinois and Columbia Powder Companies, a short distance west of the other two, were annexed.

Exhibit 2, received in evidence, is a map of North Salt Lake and adjacent area. It is a colored map with different colors representing the different areas. A photograph of the exhibit is set out on the following page with letters “A,” “B,” “C,” and “D” substituted in the photograph for the colors on the exhibit. It will be noted that the combined areas “C” and “D” were the lands annexed to the Town April 21, 1952. The area “C” is the area disconnected from the town by the decree of the trial court. The area “B” is the Island of territory not a part of the Town and the area “A” constitutes the limits of the Town prior to April 21, 1952.

[281]

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

Related

Bluffdale Mountain Homes, LC v. Bluffdale City
2007 UT 57 (Utah Supreme Court, 2007)
Doenges v. City of Salt Lake City
614 P.2d 1237 (Utah Supreme Court, 1980)
In Re the Disconnection of Territory From Layton City
494 P.2d 948 (Utah Supreme Court, 1972)
Kennecott Copper Corp. v. City of Bingham Canyon
415 P.2d 209 (Utah Supreme Court, 1966)
Marshall v. Mayor of McComb City
171 So. 2d 347 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1965)
Marshall v. MAYOR AND BOARD OF SELECTMEN OF THE CITY OF McCOMB CITY
171 So. 2d 347 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1965)
Howard v. Town of North Salt Lake
323 P.2d 261 (Utah Supreme Court, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
323 P.2d 261, 7 Utah 2d 278, 1958 Utah LEXIS 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-town-of-north-salt-lake-utah-1958.