Wade v. Salt Lake City

353 P.2d 914, 10 Utah 2d 374, 1960 Utah LEXIS 191
CourtUtah Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 7, 1960
Docket9219
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 353 P.2d 914 (Wade v. 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
Wade v. Salt Lake City, 353 P.2d 914, 10 Utah 2d 374, 1960 Utah LEXIS 191 (Utah 1960).

Opinion

HENRIOD, Justice.

Appeal from the dismissal of a complaint alleging injuries when plaintiff slipped on a *375 foreign substance in the municipal airport waiting room. Affirmed. No costs.

Only question posed is whether operation of the Salt Lake Airport was in a governmental or proprietary capacity, — ■ determining nonliability or liability. 1a

The trial court’s action precluded introduction of any evidence as to the nature and extent of any competitive business-like role of those running the airport, 2 or the lack of it. In view of statutory interdic-tions, however, of which we may take judicial notice, 3 it seems inescapable that we could conclude other than that this airport was a governmental instrumentality, not in competition with private entrepreneurs, but confined by legislation, to a restricted governmental purpose.

The state aeronautics commission, municipalities, counties and other state political subdivisions are authorized to secure and operate airport facilities, 4 singly or together, 5 “for public, governmental and municipal purposes,” 6 and property may be condemned for the purposes of the Act. 7 Local authorities may tax to effectuate such purposes. 8 The Act is titled: “Public Airports Act,” the state has sweeping regulatory power over airports, 9 and the statute itself sets the pattern for them generally. 10 Many other sections of the basic legislation, 11 make it appear that a statutory regulatory system pre-empts to the state subdivisions an authority to police and supervise airports generally, in an atmosphere of government control that either precludes proprietary operation thereof, in the ordinary sense of that word, or prevents it, absent legislative sanction. Nothing is alleged reflecting any other use than that suggested, and we take it that any purpose other than governmental must be pleaded, and be free from legislative inhibition.

Title 41-11-11, U.C.A.1953 authorizes the state to levy taxes, part of which is earmarked and distributed to local authorities operating airports, which funds are expendable for such ports under the supervision of the state aeronautics commission. *376 This statute, we feel, reflects rather more forceably, even, than the legislation adverted to above, the governmental nature of the operation of public airports in this state, and the public policy calling for official rather than proprietary operation and policing.

Something was said by plaintiff on appeal about the city having liability insurance. Nothing in the record alludes thereto, and the nature, extent and conditions thereof are not before us and not reviewable.

We are aware of the diversity of respectable authority heading in almost all directions anent interpretation of statutes dealing with airport operation. The variegation ably is treated in 66 A.L.R.2d 634. We prefer to conclude that our statutes have spoken rather clearly and emphatically in favor of tagging the operation of airports in this state by state political subdivisions under statutory authority as being accomplished in a governmental capacity, and until it is alleged and justified as an operation either sanctioned by different future legislation, the municipal airport at Salt Lake City must be held to be operating under such capacity.

CROCKETT, C. J., and WADE, McDonough and callister, jj., concur.
1a

. Jopes v. Salt Lake County, 1959, 9 Utah 2d 297, 343 P.2d 728; Ramirez v. Ogden City, 1955, 3 Utah 2d 102, 279 P.2d 403, 47 A.L.R.2d 539; Davis v. Provo City Corp. et al., 1953, 1 Utah 2d 244, 265 P.2d 415; Griffin v. Salt Lake City, 1947, 111 Utah 94, 176 P.2d 156; Niblock v. Salt Lake City, 1941, 100 Utah 573, 111 P.2d 800; Husband v. Salt Lake City, 1937, 92 Utah 449, 69 P.2d 491; Alder v. Salt Lake City, 1924, 64 Utah 568, 231 P. 1102.

2

. Jopes v. Salt Lake County, supra; Ramirez v. Ogden City, supra; Griffin v. Salt Lake City, supra.

3

. Title 78-25-1(3), Utah Code Annotated 1953.

4

. Title 2-2-3, U.C.A.1953.

5

. Title 2-2-2, U.C.A.1953.

6

. Title 2-2-4, U.C.A.1953.

7

. Title 2-2-5, U.C.A.1953.

8

. Title 2-2-8, U.C.A.1953.

9

. Title 2-1-12, U.C.A.1953.

10

. Title 2-1-1 (4), U.C.A.1953.

11

. Title 2, U.C.A.1953.

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

Related

Bowling v. City of Roanoke
568 F. Supp. 446 (W.D. Virginia, 1983)
Rumsey v. Salt Lake City
400 P.2d 205 (Utah Supreme Court, 1965)
Brinkerhoff v. Salt Lake City
371 P.2d 211 (Utah Supreme Court, 1962)
Cobia v. Roy City
366 P.2d 986 (Utah Supreme Court, 1961)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
353 P.2d 914, 10 Utah 2d 374, 1960 Utah LEXIS 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wade-v-salt-lake-city-utah-1960.