Brimhall v. Seagull Investment Co.
Brimhall v. Seagull Investment Co.
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff, pursuant to the authority granted him by the statutes of the state of Utah, took possession of the business and assets of Utah Savings & Loan Association for the purpose of liquidating its business. The plaintiff filed this action in the District Court of Utah County to foreclose a deed of trust executed by the defendant to the Utah Savings & Loan Association. The court below granted judgment in favor of the plaintiff and the defendant appeals.
The sole issue presented by the defendant’s appeal is whether or not the present action is barred by reason of two prior dismissals of actions containing the same claim.
The record before us reveals that only one summons was issued in Case No. 30293, and that that summons was quashed on motion of the defendant. The record reveals that Case No. 30293 was the only action commenced prior to the one we are here concerned with. That is the only prior action voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff.
The Court below held that the two-dismissal rule under the provisions of Rule 41(a) (1), Utah Rules of Civil Procedure did not apply in this case.
. Thomas v. Broffet’s Heirs, 6 Utah 2d 57, 305 P.2d 507; Crump v. Gold House 65 A.L.R.2d 637 Robertshaw-Fulton Restaurants, Inc., (Fla.), 96 So.2d 215, Controls Co. v. Noma Electric Co., 10 F.R.D. 32.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- W. Smoot BRIMHALL, Commissioner of Financial Institutions of the State of Utah, and v. SEAGULL INVESTMENT COMPANY, and
- Status
- Published