*1 37 verdict, more, of a cessiveness 448 P.2d necessarily show the ver- CITY, municipal corporation, SALT LAKE by passion pre- dict was arrived at Respondent, Plaintiff and judice. is true [Citation omitted.] v. might grossly the verdict he Appellant. STATE of Defendant 11141. No. disproportionate
cessive in- Supreme Court of Utah. jury say that we could fact alone as a matter law the verdict Dec. been at by passion
must have arrived
prejudice. But
facts can must such that the excess law,
be determined as a or the matter
verdict must be so excessive
shocking clear- one’s conscience and to
ly corrup- passion, prejudice, indicate
tion) jury. on the of the [Citations
omitted.] good
The instant illustra case is
tion principle of the can verdict
not stand it clearly when shows that it was
given pas either under the influence of prejudice
sion and a lack of un under
derstanding applies as it law damages.
severance
The trial court abused its discretion not granting a new trial. trial court is reversed. The verdict jury aside, re case is
manded for new trial. No costs are award
ed.
CROCKETT, J.,C. CALLISTER,
TUCKETT HENRIOD, JJ., concur. *2 Hansen, Gen., Atty.
Phil L. Dallin W. Atty. City, Jensen, Gen., Asst. Lake Salt appellant. Leon A. Holmgren, Atty., Homer Halgren, Atty., Asst. respondent. ELLETT, Justice: a declar- In obtained matter this atory holding that its Territory and State of use of to the grant was invalid. The Utah was years ago. some 80 At the time moved seeking to have City; from Fillmore to Salt to make Legislature to induce order change, into fathers entered land, less, necessary may territorial more or with leaders of Hill, subsequently suitably government reduc- situated on for res * * * writing in form of a series purposes, ed to ervoir statutes, ordinance, including documents 1, Indenture, D.May after 1888. An duly regularly enacted and resolutions reciting prior matters which had there- passed. sequence of the written transpired, tofore continued: follows : documents WHEREAS the said offer and tender A. March 1888. The Council lands of Salt Lake Territory nearly tendered to the of Utah Utah, Territory been 20 acres of land be used and dedicated to cepted by Territory, subject Capitol Buildings the erection of the conditions, limitations and restric- Territory or future State of Utah. forth; tions in specified said offer now therefore Be it Resolved B. Legislative March 1888. The As- Council sembly Territory resolu- authorized execute
tion, duly accepted the offer tender conveyance deed of of the lands herein- of land made subject to the condi- before described to the tions set forth in the offer. *3 subj ect to the conditions named. C. March Council therefore, pursuance Now in said of
adopted following resolution: and resolution of consideration A resolution ratifying and confirming premises Dollar, and of the sum of One land, donation Salt of money lawful of the United States of for the site of Building for the America, paid by hand the second Territory Utah, of Whereas the of part, receipt whereof Salt Lake has offered and tendered knowledged, the party said the first of Territory conditions, of Utah under the presents grant, these bar- limitations and restrictions hereinafter sell, convey gain, and confirm unto the named the following described lands and party part, and to its said second premises to be used and devoted to the assigns successors forever of Capitol Buildings erection of for following premises described land and Utah, or the future State of [Description]. to wit: [Description] Containing nine teen and forty six one hundredths hold, granted To have and to the above * * * acres; (194%oo) addi premises appurtenances; also an with the one tional half interest five acres every part party thereof unto the said of assigns part, its successors
the second Armstrong By forever, Francis (SEAL) and maintenance for the erection Capitol buildings Utah Terri- of of
tory the future State Ch. XXVIII. E. 1888 Laws surroundings, appurtenances and proper Legislature created The Territorial including a reservoir to said on Commissioners “Board pur- and for other buildings grounds possession and take control Grounds” to subject to grant is made But this poses; City, and conveyed by Salt Lake the land upon following restrictions appropriated and $25,000 the sum limitations, viz.; [Emphasis added.] improving and expended in subsequently purposes grounds for beautifying the Ter- Capitol buildings of That the conveyance contemplated in the deed be ritory of Utah shall or future State in con- to construct reservoir and also lands; upon That such build- said erected pur- junction with ings exclusively Territorial used for be grounds pose supplying water to the portion of purposes; That the or State buildings thereon. erected actually buildings said devoted land XXXIX, 13, 1890. Ch. L.U. F. March improved and culti- as aforesaid shall $10,000 Item 52 amount public park: That vated as a Whenever approved as follows: purposes which this for improvement capítol For carried out and made shall cease to be expended be drawn grounds to grounds shall cease to used capítol supervision of the com- under the Capitol grounds or Territorial ** * $10,000.00. mission provided, purposes herein then Provided, amount be that the above provided cease and this trust herein shall that Salt Lake pended on condition absolutely become and of no void furnish, free of sufficient grant- effect and said lands revert building pro- or. posed to be erected thereon.1 whereof, party the said In witness *4 part presents
the first has caused these 29, April of Com- 1890. The Board G. by signed Mayor its and attested let- Capitol Grounds wrote a missioners on corporate day year Mayor and first seal Council of Salt ter City calling the fact that attention to above written. subsequently expended provided appropriated for in the Act. were 1. The funds thus spent constructing the State had the res- of Salt Lake and the Governor spent ervoir almost twice the amount of the State of Utah as follows: adjustment. requesting Agreement This made entered in- The letter : further stated day October, this 25th A.D. your I would call attention to the fact City, and between Salt Lake munic- Legislature appropriated that the late ipal corporation State $10,000.00 improvement sum of Utah: grounds, proviso with the WHEREAS the State of Utah charge furnish water without quired certain adjoining present lands grounds any building erected there- Capitol Grounds specifically on. As this ivas understood is now the intention State with arrangements when were improve of Utah park said land and work, begin there is not the same and to maintain the same as a [Emphasis much need to take note it.of part Capitol of the State Grounds. THEREFORE, NOW in consideration 6,May H. 1890. A resolution improvement of said parking and the adopted granting free use grounds, mainte- Capitol grounds of water as follows: nance Capitol thereof as the State Legislature appropri- Whereas late Grounds, agree $10,000.00 ated the the im- sum of per- State of the former provement Capitol of the Grounds with petual free use water for the proviso furnish water Grounds, purposes for which any used, shall also extend to such addi- building thereon— erected parked, improved tional land shall be maintained as a
Be it resolved the free use of wa- Grounds of the State. add- granted ter be the Commission for the use of the and for the Grounds ed.]
use of building erected thereon —in is understood and specific accordance with the understand- possible will be as economical as ing arrangements with the when upon the use such additional begin were made to work on said parked improved, land as shall grounds. and will conserve the said water I. October agree- 1926. A written by using only pre1- a sufficient amount to ment was entered into and between beauty serve and maintain the *5 250,000 lawns, flowers, and draws some visitors each grounds, trees tion year. shrubbery asset to It is a valuable economic thereof. City. WHEREOF, par- IN WITNESS Capitol securely
ties set their hands that the is located have hereunto Now hereto day year danger above in is in no and seals the first authority removed, promises a resolu- being written. Done made to obtain of Commissioners tion the Board here become somewhat location have hopes Utah. find now a corroded loophole by escape it can from its CITY, LAKE UTAH SALT duty supply Capitol the water By Neslen C. Clarence Complex according agreements. to its agreements contends that now Accepted the STATE OF UTAH public consideration, against were without By H. Dern Geo. policy, ultra vires. Governor. city has no more It is clear that a City acknowledged By this than has a right repudiate contracts duty to furnish the water it had a private person unless the contract deals also the use of the Grounds The governmental with a function. formerly a acknowledged that it had proprietary ac selling engaged water is use grant free State of governmental capacity. tivity in its and not be ex- of water and Municipal The law is forth in 63 purchased by to the additional land tended C.J.S. Corporations as follows: § orig- adjoining the State the land in the ground grant, long inal as the pertaining law to a rules of valid The parked as a and maintained corporation are contract of Capitol Grounds of the State. pertaining to different from those contract; municipality is other kept bargain: The State It did move by the to the extent that a bound contract City; has erect- to Salt private corporation, person, or natural buildings costing millions ed of dollars entity legal a contract other bound expended over one-half million dollars it, especially into or entered him expend landscaping grounds; the contract relates a matter not where $40,000 per year maintaining those over governmental in its nature. park public chiefly as a for the use XI, The and benefit the local citizens. that Article Sec. also claims major prevents Complex tourist attrac- of the State Constitution ed, pay current rates granting it should not have the free use of water City agreed to which the to the State. That section reads: furnish.2 directly municipal corporation, shall No lease, sell, indirectly, dispose alien why the There is another reason any waterworks, rights, City. provision constitutional cannot aid now, sources of water hereafter eight adopted That some document was it;
to be owned or controlled but years made, and since after the *6 waterworks, rights such water prospective only it purpose is its and ef supply now owned sources of water fect, it the would not relate back if even any municipal acquired by hereafter to be grant were of the waterworks. corporation, preserved, maintain- shall be establishing The by supplying it its operated ed and City Salt Lake many was a con result of at water reasonable inhabitants with ferences positions responsi of men in of Provided, charges: nothing That herein bility territory. in both the prevent contained shall be construed to arrangements The had to be worked out corporation such period a up of over time. Matters water-rights, wa- changing or sources of put resolutions, on had to be in the form of water-rights or supply, ter for other ordinances, agreements. laws and written equal value, water sources of agreements by The actual reached and be in like manner to the and to be devoted politic tween the two bodies must be deter public supply of inhabitants. its mined from consideration all controlling. The This section is not together available with the un documents waterworks, dispose did not its derstanding parties manifest simply rights, supply. It or water ed what was done in there connection agreed upon sufficient consideration with. From a consideration of above, named conditions furnish water on it clear that there seems were mutual making any promises further there Ter rights ritory; still kept for. It owns its water claiming any promises fully; years The is not waterworks. that for some 75 rights merely adverse thereto. claims City kept promises it made. There long ample maintains was and is consideration keeps park- promise to furnish water without * * language May 2. The of the resolution of Commission add- 6, 1890, is: “Be it resolved ed.] granted, free use making charge. agreement agreement. a current The but for the execution of the I run ground does not counter to the Constitution would affirm the trial court on the the State of Utah and is neither ultra vires stated above. against public policy.
nor perpetuity, This contract continues in The claims of the are not well therefore, improvident, against public grounded. long So as the State maintains policy. interesting speculate It would be keeps on what this court would do if had a grounds parked, obligated it that contract before was executed in 1926 reasonably the amount furnish of water re- guaranteeing Airlines, to furnish Western quired according agreements. agency, water, granting or a federal large together tract of land with judgment the trial re- court is runways care and maintenance needed versed enter a with directions to buildings, the like of which exists to- opin- for the State in accordance with this day at rapidly Salt Lake’s growing inter- ion. costs are No awarded. airport only national on —conditioned airline to make Salt Lake an CROCKETT, J.,C. and CALLISTER airplane stop-off point. opinion I am of TUCKETT, JJ., concur. such under a contract would HENRIOD, (dissenting). Justice be broke now. *7 dissent, believing I that the contract was accepted generally It is that a con- vires, 1) public 2) against ultra policy and tract, enforceable, be to be must certain as 3) uncertain to terms. provides to This its terms. contract very (1)There is no constitutional and water will be furnished free judicial authority little eternity beyond mu- sanctions here to certain- —which nicipal ly binding comport officers’ their successors does not either with sensible public purposes inordinately to certainty legal concepts relating un- sensible time equally reasonable in the future.1 to It seems contracts. The contract uncer- expired to me such reasonable time tain be- as minimum to or maximum amounts years. for 80 here during contract 'for of furnished business, public purpose, e., i. stimulate special period, which size facilities are to etc., used, and there is building buildings no indication what size delivered, many would not have come it is to be to how Rhyne, Municipal Law, p. length 10-5, public pur sonadle 1. Sec. of time for ** says governing poses “A may body a rea- bind its successors and whether people benefitted or animals culinary irrigation water.
it shall be “proprie-
I distinction between think the authority is not
tary” “governmental”
quite Such apropos in a case this. like tort generally is made where
distinction immunity in- governmental are
liability and Here, duty has a to fur-
volved. community, water, aof
nish the life-blood irrespective private inhabitants duty ex contractu to It had
contract. no city popula- segment of the
furnish one
tion, employee, state furnish —the —or shrubbery. In the in- have case, contract would
stant Capitol, though even
to furnish water City’s water resources doing
may entirely be consumed exhausted. trial
I court. would affirm P.2d 707 COMPANY, CANAL
GUNNISON-FAYETTE corporation, Plaintiff a Utah Respondent,
v. COMPANY, IRRIGATION
GUNNISON corporation, Defendant a Utah Appellant.
No. 11209.
Supreme Court Utah.
Dec.