Kendell v. North Ogden City
This text of 2003 UT 42 (Kendell v. North Ogden 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.
Opinion
¶ 1 Petitioners, residents of North Ogden, initially challenged whether a ballot title related to serving beer for on-premises consumption was a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the referendum.1 Petitioners have now withdrawn any challenge to the referendum’s wording, and instead request that the referendum be divided into its two major sections, allowing the voters to vote on each section independently.
¶ 2 Petitioners offer no compelling reason for this division, and we see no reason to impose it. The referendum is short, approximately eleven lines, and uncomplicated. We will not tamper with the wording of ballot initiatives where there is no compelling reason to do so. We also encourage petitioners in the future to weigh the time and energy expended in bringing these types of appeals before this court, when such matters may best be resolved on the local level.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2003 UT 42, 84 P.3d 1134, 2003 Utah LEXIS 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kendell-v-north-ogden-city-utah-2003.