Court Opinion

ID: 9559485
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:30:07.764075+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:12.476394
License: Public Domain

CROCKETT, Justice
(concurring in result):
I agree with the result of the main opinion in affirming the judgment. But I except therefrom statements concerning matters which I am unable to see the necessity of setting forth in this decision. See Manual on Appellate Court Opinions, Witkin, p. *419236. I regret to further extend the matter, but think it should be borne in mind that Sec. 19 or Art. VIII of our Constitution, provides that:
There shall be but one form of civil action, and law and equity may be administered in the same action.
Numerous of our cases have dealt with this subject, the general import of which is that the technical distinctions between law and equity are largely abolished, except to follow that mandate of our Constitution and to give the parties the relief to which they are entitled (see Rules 1 and 54(c), U.R.C.P.) as the interests of justice require whether in law or equity, or a combination thereof. (See e. g. Valley Mortuary v. Fairbanks, Utah, 119 Utah 204, 225 P.2d 739).