Skip to main content
· 12/2/1977

Richardson v. Grand Central Corp.

Citations

  • 572 P.2d 395
  • 1977 Utah LEXIS 1323

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that, although one trial judge had denied the defendant's summary judgment motion, the second judge properly granted a directed verdict motion in favor of the defendant after the plaintiff had an opportunity to present his evidence at trial
  • holding that, although one trial judge had denied the defendant‘s summary judgment motion, the second judge properly granted a directed verdict motion in favor of the defendant after the plaintiff had an opportunity to present his evidence at trial
  • recognizing that the law of the case doctrine promotes judicial economy because it aids in \avoid[ing] the delays and the difficulties involved in repetitious contentions and rulings upon the same proposition in the same case\
  • stating purpose of law of the case doctrine is “to avoid the delays and the difficulties involved in repetitious contentions and rulings upon the same proposition in the same case”
  • stating purpose of law of the case doctrine is \to avoid the delays and the difficulties involved in repetitious contentions and rulings upon the same proposition in the same case\
  • another judge from same court can consider same question of law if presented in a different light

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Crockett, Ellett, Maughan, Wilkins, Hall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.