Main Parking Mall v. Salt Lake City Corp.
| Decision Date | 31 January 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 13722,13722 |
| Citation | 531 P.2d 866 |
| Parties | The MAIN PARKING MALL, a Utah Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION and Redevelopment development Agency of Salt LakeCity, et al., Defendants and Respondents. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Louis H. Callister and W. Clark Burt, Callister, Greene & Nebeker, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and appellant.
B. Lloyd Poelman, Stephen G. Stocker, Strong, Poelman & Fox, Salt Lake City, for defendants and respondents.
This is an appeal from an order of the district court dismissing the plaintiff's complaint on the grounds that it did not state a cause of action. The plaintiff is here seeking a reversal.
The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City acquired title to all of the property of a city block lying between Second South Street and Third South Street, Main Street and West Temple Street except the property fronting on Main Street and a parcel situated on the southwest corner of the block. The property was previously held by a number of owners including the plaintiff. The Redevelopment Agency acquired the plaintiff's property by purchase. After the property was acquired and cleared of old buildings and obstructions, it was offered for redevelopment by private developers. The offering of the property was advertised in the local newspapers and other publications. A number of offers were received from prospective redevelopers, and after reviewing the offers the Redevelopment Agency determined that proposals submitted by Hartnett-Shaw Development Company, Inc., met the requirements established by the Agency. In order to permit Hartnett-Shaw to investigate the site and to prepare plans for its development, the Redevelopment Agency offered to Hartnett-Shaw for a period of 180 days an exclusive right to negotiate for and to purchase the property. The Redevelopment Agency's offer was accepted by Hartnett-Shaw.
The contract formed by the offer of the Redevelopment Agency and its acceptance by Hartnett-Shaw Development Company was before the district court and before this court on appeal. The plaintiff asked the court to set aside the contract as being beyond the powers granted to the Redevelopment Agency and therefore void. The plaintiff further claims that the contract is so ambiguous and uncertain as to render it unenforceable. The plaintiff prays that the contract be construed pursuant to the provisions of Section 78--33--2, U.C.A.1953, which is in the following language:
Any person interested under a deed, will or written contract, or whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract or franchise,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jenkins v. Swan
...Jenkins v. Finlinson, Utah, 607 P.2d 289 (1980) (citing Baird v. State, Utah, 574 P.2d 713 (1978)). See also Main Parking Mall v. Salt Lake City Corp., Utah, 531 P.2d 866 (1975); Lyon v. Bateman, 119 Utah 434, 228 P.2d 818 (1951). Requirements (2) and (3) represent the traditional test for ......
-
Shobe v. Latimer
...not enter into void contracts, or in forcing contracting parties to live up to their promises. See, e. g., Main Parking Mall v. Salt Lake City Corporation, 531 P.2d 866 (Utah 1975). 3 This general rule was well expressed in Wells v. Bank of Nevada, 90 Nev. 192, 522 P.2d 1014 Controversies a......
-
Terracor v. Utah Bd. of State Lands & Forestry
...702 P.2d at 454; Stromquist v. Cokayne, supra, 646 P.2d at 747; Sears v. Ogden City, supra, 572 P.2d at 1362; Main Parking Mall v. Salt Lake City Corp., Utah, 531 P.2d 866 (1975); Johnson v. State Tax Commission, 17 Utah 2d 337, 342 n.7, 411 P.2d 831, 834 n.7 (1966); State v. Kallas, 97 Uta......
-
Blodgett v. Zions First Nat. Bank
...interest in the subject matter of the litigation. Consequently, she lacks standing under the first test. See Main Parking Mall v. Salt Lake City Corp., 531 P.2d 866, 867 (Utah 1975). The second test offers Purcell no further assistance. Under the second test, we must determine whether any o......