Roger I. McDonough

The case involved Kenneth D. Knepper, who rented a typewriter worth $140 and failed to return it after his business venture failed, leading to his conviction for embezzlement under Section 76-17-5. The trial court found him guilty based on evidence that he wilfully did not return the item, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The court held that the statutory definition of "wilfully" requires only awareness and willingness to commit the act, which the facts supported over the defendant's excuses, and that the typewriter fell within the statute's coverage of rented "appliance" or "equipment," applying the statute according to its fair import rather than strict construction against the state.

criminal lawproperty

The case involved a former salesman suing his employer for unpaid commissions on medical supply sales made prior to his termination and for attorney fees, while the employer counterclaimed for mistaken commission payments and damages from the plaintiff's alleged breach of a post-employment non-solicitation covenant. The trial court awarded the plaintiff $1,436.76 in additional commissions and $860 in fees, and denied the counterclaim; the Utah Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that the employment contract entitled the plaintiff to commissions on sales for which his pre-termination efforts had laid the groundwork, even if delivery and billing occurred later, and that cashing a final check marked "payment in full" did not constitute an accord and satisfaction barring further recovery. It further held that the employer failed to prove damages from any covenant breach and that the wage statute allowing attorney fees applied to commission-based compensation.

labor & employment

The case involved plaintiffs who purchased an intercom and fire alarm system under multiple related contracts, including a conditional sales contract, a home modernization contract for monthly payments, and separate agreements promising referral bonuses and advertising payments; they sued to void the contracts on grounds of fraud, alleging the referral promises were illusory and never intended to be performed. A jury found for the plaintiffs on special interrogatories, but the trial court entered judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The Utah Supreme Court reversed, holding that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, provided a reasonable basis for the jury to find fraud, including high-pressure sales tactics, failure to follow up on referrals, contract alterations without notice, the assignee's lack of inquiry into irregularities, and an excessive price. The court concluded that the assignee, Prudential Federal Savings, was not an innocent purchaser and was bound by the rescission for fraud, and remanded for entry of judgment on the jury verdict.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case arose from a 1962 automobile collision on a Utah highway in which one driver was killed and his passenger seriously injured; the jury found the teenage driver and his family liable for damages but exonerated passenger Byron Deleeuw, and the plaintiffs appealed only that portion of the verdict. The court affirmed the judgment for Deleeuw, ruling that the trial court correctly refused a joint-venture instruction because the duck-hunting outing was a social trip among friends that gave no passenger the right to control the vehicle. The court also held that any remark by defense counsel was cured by the trial judge’s admonition and that the instructions on negligence and proximate cause, read as a whole, accurately stated the law and produced no prejudice.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In this case, Kennecott Copper Corporation petitioned under Utah statutes to disconnect approximately 90% of the City of Bingham Canyon's territory, arguing that the expansion of its open-pit copper mine had eliminated any need for municipal services in the area and that city regulations hindered mining operations. The district court granted the petition after a hearing, and the City appealed, primarily citing the loss of about $28,000 in annual sales and use tax revenue. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the disconnection, finding that the trial court properly weighed the lack of inhabitants or future residential use in the territory against the City's surplus funds and the availability of substitute services, concluding that justice and equity supported severance and that tax revenue loss alone did not require denial. The court noted that determinations of fact on such equitable issues are primarily for the trial court and upheld its judgment as not clearly erroneous.

propertybusiness & regulatorytaxes

The case involved a wrongful death lawsuit brought by Mrs. Louise Taylor against defendant Johnson after Johnson's car struck a trailer at a highway accident scene, killing Taylor's husband who was assisting with the removal. A jury awarded the plaintiff $28,000, and the defendant appealed, claiming errors in jury instructions regarding contributory negligence and the admission of expert testimony estimating the defendant's speed from skid marks. The court affirmed the judgment, ruling that the instructions properly preserved the contributory negligence issue for the jury and correctly advised on the burden of proof, while the speed evidence was admissible as it was based on the officers' experience and unchallenged charts. The court emphasized reading instructions as a whole and deferring to the trial court's discretion on expert qualifications.

torts & liabilityprocedure

Frances Spencer sued Salt Lake City after tripping and falling on a sidewalk raised four to six inches by tree roots in front of 463 Douglas Street on June 27, 1964, alleging the city negligently failed to maintain the sidewalk. The trial court dismissed the case on the grounds that the claim was not filed within the 30-day statutory period and did not state the amount of damages claimed. The Utah Supreme Court reversed the dismissal, finding the claim was timely filed on July 27, 1964, and substantially complied with the statute by providing the time, place, nature of the defect, and injury, which fulfilled the purpose of giving the city notice to investigate. The court reasoned that technical defects, such as omitting a damages amount that could not be known precisely within 30 days, should not nullify a claim that otherwise meets the statute's requirements, and remanded the case for trial.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved plaintiffs suing an automobile insurer to collect on an unsatisfied judgment from a car accident against the insured driver, Darrell Wood, who was covered under his father's policy. The insurer defended on the ground that Wood breached the policy's cooperation clause by failing to attend trial or sign his deposition. The court affirmed judgment for the plaintiffs. It reasoned that Wood had cooperated by giving a sworn statement and allowing his deposition, the insurer failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in securing further cooperation or any resulting prejudice, and the company should have anticipated difficulty locating him.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a personal injury lawsuit brought by a pedestrian traffic guard against a driver after a collision at a marked crosswalk in St. George, Utah, in which the plaintiff was struck while attempting to guide a child across the street. A jury returned a $10,000 verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed, arguing that several jury instructions improperly shifted the burden of proof, directed a finding of negligence, conflicted with one another, or were given in the wrong order, and that plaintiff's counsel made an improper closing argument. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the instructions, when read together, correctly stated the law on negligence, contributory negligence, right-of-way duties, and burden of proof; that the sequence of instructions did not mislead the jury; and that the closing argument did not improperly appeal to sympathy or passion.

torts & liability

The case involved an insurance company suing its Utah agent for failing to remit approximately $4,672 in premiums collected from a trucking company for public liability and property damage coverage. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed. The court rejected the agent's defenses of res judicata and an invalid certificate of authority, finding the record insufficient to support them and that the pretrial order properly limited the issues to misappropriation of funds. It also held that a telegram binder created valid, enforceable coverage for the period in question, triggering the agent's statutory fiduciary duty to account for and pay over the premiums received.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case concerned whether a reservation of "coal and other minerals" in a state land grant, as required by Utah statute, included sand and gravel on Section 32 in the Island Park area, which the State Department of Fish & Game owned in fee subject to the reservation. The court held that sand and gravel are not included in the reservation under usual circumstances. It reached this conclusion by applying ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis to interpret "other minerals" as referring to valuable substances like coal that are extracted by prospecting or mining, and by noting that sand and gravel are common surface materials whose reservation would frequently nullify the underlying land grant.

property

This case involved numerous buyers who purchased television sets under conditional sales contracts from Utah Electronics and simultaneously entered a "Reference Sales Plan" promising payments for referrals, which the buyers alleged was a fraudulent and illusory scheme. The buyers sued both the seller and its assignee Continental Thrift & Loan Company for fraud and usury; a jury found against the seller but for Continental, and the buyers appealed the rulings dismissing their fraud claims against Continental, refusing to treat the agreements as one transaction, and rejecting usury. The court affirmed the judgment for Continental, holding that fraud requires clear and convincing evidence which was lacking given Continental's precautions to confirm the contracts' separateness, that the waiver of defenses against assignees was enforceable and the agreements were independent, and that a higher credit price than cash price does not constitute usury in a bona fide sale. The court also noted that about half the contracts were financed by other institutions.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

The case concerned a dispute over ownership of a fourplex apartment that had been part of the estate of Miles E. Miller, who died in 1956. His will gave all property to his wife Nettie, stating that he knew she would care for their children from any remainder, and the probate court distributed the property to her outright. After Nettie died and left the property to their daughter Viola, the sons sued, arguing that the will had created a trust requiring the property to be shared among all children. The court held that the probate decree was final and unambiguous in granting fee simple title to the wife, and that the will's language expressed a clear devise without imposing any trust or restriction. It further relied on a statute providing that clear devises cannot be limited by statements of reasons or other less distinct language.

propertyfamily lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute over ownership of a $1500 savings account at a credit union, where the deceased father and his son had signed a joint account card providing for joint ownership with right of survivorship. After the father's death, the estate's executrix and the son both claimed the funds, which the credit union deposited with the court. The Supreme Court of Utah affirmed the trial court's ruling that the account belonged to the estate rather than the son. The court reasoned that the joint account card created only a rebuttable presumption of ownership, which could be overcome by clear and convincing evidence of the parties' intent; the son's testimony established that he had made no deposits or withdrawals, never accessed the account, and that neither he nor his father intended any transfer of interest during the father's lifetime, rendering it an invalid attempted testamentary disposition.

propertyfamily law

A two-and-a-half-year-old girl suffered severe leg injuries when her foot became caught in a descending escalator at a J.C. Penney store while shopping with her mother. She sued the store and related companies through her guardian ad litem, and a jury awarded her $12,500 in damages. The trial court submitted the case to the jury under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which the Supreme Court of Utah affirmed as properly allowing an inference of negligence because escalators are commonly used safely and were under the defendant's exclusive control; the court held that the absence of a specific negligence finding in special interrogatories did not defeat the general verdict. The court also ruled that the defendant could pursue its third-party claim against the elevator maintenance company, which had been dismissed without prejudice below.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a lawsuit by Ada Williams and her husband against Joyce Lloyd for injuries and related losses from an automobile collision, with liability admitted and only the amount of damages contested at trial. The jury awarded the plaintiffs significantly less than requested, leading them to seek a new trial or additur, which the trial court denied, prompting this appeal. The Supreme Court of Utah affirmed the judgment, holding that the jury's determination of damages was supported by evidence of pre-existing conditions and credibility concerns, and that there was no procedural error in supplementing the jury instructions on the burden of proof.

torts & liabilityprocedure

Plaintiffs sued to foreclose a mortgage on real property after defendant did not pay a note, while defendant defended by claiming breach of a separate contract to form a corporation for apartment construction and counterclaimed for specific performance. The court decided in favor of plaintiffs, affirming the foreclosure and rejecting the defenses. It reasoned that the joint project agreement had been abandoned by both parties' actions, including the defendant's independent securing of a loan and payment of one note, and that the quitclaim deed satisfied the conveyance obligation without any warranty of full title.

property

In San Juan County v. Jen, Inc., the plaintiffs (the county and state tax commission) sought to collect unpaid property taxes assessed on a depleted uranium mine after the property was sold in foreclosure proceedings for nonpayment, arguing that the taxes remained a personal debt of the owner (Jen, Inc.) that could be satisfied from other assets. The Seventh District Court ruled against the plaintiffs, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that under Utah statutes governing property taxation (including Sections 59-10-1, 59-10-3, and 59-10-47), taxes on real property create a lien only against the assessed property itself rather than a personal obligation of the owner, and the statutory foreclosure sale extinguishes that lien without allowing further recourse. The decision rested on the statutory scheme for mining property taxes calculated via a net annual proceeds formula, which provides no mechanism for an in personam judgment once the property has been sold to satisfy the lien.

taxesproperty

The case involved a father's lawsuit against a driver after her car struck and killed his six-and-a-half-year-old son, who was riding a bicycle along a Utah road. The trial court instructed the jury on the standard of care expected of a child of the deceased's age and declined to instruct on the last clear chance doctrine, resulting in a verdict for the defendant. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, reasoning that the jury instructions correctly framed the child's duty of care by reference to his age, intelligence, and experience without imposing an improper fixed standard, and that last clear chance did not apply because the driver had no clear opportunity to avoid the collision and the child was not in inextricable peril. The court held any error in the particularized instructions was not prejudicial.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In Weyher v. Peterson, the vendor brought an eviction action under the Forcible Entry and Detainer Statute and the parties' Uniform Real Estate Contract after the vendee defaulted on installment payments for a house and land; the vendee counterclaimed to recover alleged equity in the property after vacating. The trial court dismissed the counterclaim and entered judgment for the vendor, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that the contract's forfeiture clause was enforceable because the vendor had provided repeated notices and opportunities to cure, had not waived strict compliance, and the total rental value plus damages to the vendor exceeded the payments the vendee had made, making retention of those payments not unconscionable.

property