Eyring v. Fairbanks

1 Citing case

  1. Allen v. Hall

    2005 UT App. 23 (Utah Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 2 times

    See Nunley v. Westates Casing Servs., Inc., 1999 UT 100, ¶ 31, 989 P.2d 1077 (reviewing trial court's legal conclusions regarding application of estoppel doctrine for correctness); Jeffs v. Stubbs, 970 P.2d 1234, 1240 (Utah 1998) (reviewing interpretation of Claimants Act for correctness); Nelson v. Provo City, 2000 UT App 204, ¶ 9, 6 P.3d 567 (reviewing questions of property law for correctness); Anderson v. Doms, 1999 UT App 207, ¶ 8, 984 P.2d 392 ("[T]he determination of whether a party was prejudiced for purposes of the doctrine of laches is a legal conclusion that we review for correctness[.]"); Eyring v. Fairbanks, 918 P.2d 489, 491 (Utah Ct.App. 1996) (reviewing divorce decree for ambiguity under correctness standard); Progressive Acquisition, Inc. v. Lytle, 806 P.2d 239, 242 (Utah Ct.App. 1991) ("Review of the trial court's conclusion as to the legal effect of the bankruptcy court's orders presents a question of law.") ANALYSIS