Wasatch Livestock Loan Co. v. District Court In And for Uintah County
| Decision Date | 14 June 1935 |
| Docket Number | 5576 |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
| Parties | WASATCH LIVESTOCK LOAN CO. v. DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR UINTAH COUNTY et al |
Proceeding by the Wasatch Livestock Loan Company against the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District in and for Uintah County, and others, for writ of certiorari to review an order denying a motion to quash the summons in an action brought by the defendant Annie Bowden, as administratrix of the estate of Joseph H. Bowden, deceased, against the Wasatch Livestock Loan Company.
Order annulled, and District Court restrained from taking further proceedings.
Thomas & Thomas, of Salt Lake City, for plaintiff.
Ray E Dillman, of Roosevelt, for defendants.
A writ of certiorari was issued to review an order of the district court of Uintah county denying plaintiff's motion to quash summons and service thereof in an action brought by the defendant Annie Bowden, as administratrix of the estate of Joseph H. Bowden, deceased, against Wasatch Livestock Loan Company. Plaintiff filed a brief in support of its petition. Defendant filed no brief but has submitted the cause without brief or argument. The record in the case from the district court is now before us. The summons served on defendant in the district court case omits to state whether a complaint had already been filed or whether one would thereafter be filed, thereby wholly failing to indicate and to advise the defendant therein how the action had been commenced, whether by service of summons or by filing a complaint. The defendant therein appeared specially and moved to quash the summons. This motion was denied by the trial court.
The statute requires that a summons shall indicate by its contents the manner in which the action is commenced. By R S. Utah 1933, 104-5-1, an action may be commenced either by the filing of a complaint with the clerk of the court in which the action is brought, or by service of summons. By section 104-5-2 the appropriate language to be used in either case is specified; that is, the summons must indicate the precise manner in which the action is commenced by stating in express words "which has been filed with the clerk of said court," if the action be commenced by the filing of a complaint, or "which, within ten days after service of this summons upon you,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas v. District Court of Third Judicial Dist. In and For Salt Lake County
...in aid thereof. Since the issue of certiorari was not raised by the parties, and in view of the decision of this court in the Wasatch Livestock Loan case, cited supra, the writer does think we should volunteer the issue and dispose of the case on a matter of form. The cause is remanded to t......
-
Coman v. Williams
...the county in which the action is commenced. Our search for authority has brought only a meager reward. In Wasatch Livestock Loan Company v. District Court, 86 Utah 422, 46 P.2d 399, it was held that under the Utah statutes an action may be commenced either by the filing of the complaint wi......
-
Stichting Mayflower Mountain Fonds v. JORDANELLE SPECIAL SERVICE DIST.
...4(c)(2). To notify the party being served "the precise manner in which the action is commenced[,]" Wasatch Livestock Loan Co. v. District Court, 86 Utah 422, 423, 46 P.2d 399, 399 (1935), Rule 4 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a summons "shall state either that the compla......
-
Locke v. Peterson
...of the default. 1 Utah Commercial & Savings Bank v. Trumbo, 17 Utah 198, 53 P. 1033.1 See Wasatch Livestock Loan Co. v. District Court in and for Uintah County, 86 Utah 422, 46 P.2d 399; Farmers' Banking Co. v. Bullen, 62 Utah 1, 217 P. 969.2 Utah Commercial & Savings Bank v. Trumbo, 17 Uta......