# Keigley v. Bench, City Recorder

> Utah Supreme Court · April 19, 1939 · 97 Utah 69

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3985786

## Case

- **Full name:** KEIGLEY Et Al. v. BENCH, City Recorder
- **Court:** Utah Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 19, 1939
- **Citations:** 97 Utah 69; 89 P.2d 480; 122 A.L.R. 756; 1939 Utah LEXIS 46
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wolfe
- **Judges:** McDonough, Larson, Wolfe, Moffat, Pratt
- **Cited by:** 36 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3985786

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the legislature contemplated that a governing body of a city has administrative as well as legislative functions, and they intended to limit referendum proceedings to legislative acts
- holding that issuing bonds to finance construction of municipal electric plant and system was legislative in nature and subject to referendum

## Opinion text

WOLFE, Justice
(concurring).
I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice McDonough except as to the order made. I think the order should require only the legislative parts of the ordinance to be referred and not the whole ordinance. The parts are not interdependent. They might have been ordained in separate ordinances. The old law was that a prayer for mandamus was a unit. If the officer could not be commanded in all he could not be commanded in any part. In later times when the petition was to command him to do separate acts and some were required and others were within his discretion, the former only were compelled where the acts sought to be compelled were not tied into each other in such a manner that the commanding of the purely ministerial act would be denying the officer his possessed discretion as to the remaining acts. The writ, I think, is now sufficiently flexible to permit
*85
severable parts to be referred and the others to be withheld. In consequence I think the order should so read.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3985786. Public record. Not legal advice.