Pamela Greenwood

The case involved a dispute between Pacific West Communities and Grantsville City over the city's denial of a planned unit development (PUD) application for phase two of the Country Haven Condominiums project. Pacific West sought to develop the phase under a new plan, but the city council determined it constituted a major adjustment not in substantial conformity with the original 1997 approval and denied the application. Pacific West also sought declaratory judgments that the prior PUD did not apply to phase two due to termination, amendments to the CC&Rs, or its status as a bona fide purchaser. The district court upheld the denial of the application but granted declaratory relief to Pacific West; on appeal, the court affirmed the denial while reversing the declaratory judgments because the underlying claims had not been preserved by raising them before the city council. The core reasoning centered on limits of appellate review to the administrative record and requirements for issue preservation in land-use proceedings.

propertybusiness & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved a dispute between landlord Red Cliffs Corner, LLC and tenant J.J. Hunan, Inc. over a commercial lease for restaurant space, where the landlord sought to terminate the lease due to the tenant's late rent payments after the tenant had raised issues about the landlord's work on the premises. The trial court ruled that the landlord could terminate the lease, that the tenant had waived claims for breach regarding the premises condition via a signed agreement, and denied the tenant's motion to amend its counterclaim as well as the landlord's request for attorney fees, while also releasing the landlord's possession bond. On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's interpretation of the lease, the termination ruling, and the waiver finding, but reversed and remanded in part on other issues such as the bond and amendment denial. The core reasoning centered on the plain language of the integrated lease contract and the tenant's acceptance of the premises with limited exceptions in the modification agreement.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

In State v. Dominguez, the defendant was convicted of DUI after evidence from a blood draw was obtained pursuant to a telephonic search warrant. The defendant moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that the warrant process violated Utah Rule of Criminal Procedure 40 because the magistrate directed the officer to sign the documents, including the magistrate's name, without retaining, sealing, or filing them and without recording the conversation. The court determined that the procedure did not comply with the rule's requirements for magistrates, which were implemented following Anderson v. Taylor to ensure proper custody and independent verification of warrants. It reversed the conviction and remanded with instructions to grant the motion to suppress.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves a mother's appeal from a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to her four children. The Guardian Ad Litem moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing lack of jurisdiction over the two youngest children because their father's parental rights had not yet been terminated and the case remained open as to him. The court held that it had jurisdiction because the termination order fully resolved the mother's parental status as to all children and effected a permanent change in their legal relationship with her, making the order final and appealable under precedents like In re A.F. The court then affirmed the termination on the merits, noting that the mother conceded the juvenile court's factual findings and legal conclusions were correct and offered no basis to overturn them under the applicable standard of review.

family lawprocedure

In Williams v. Bench, plaintiffs sued individual members of an unincorporated social club after one member drove over and injured Mrs. Williams while she slept at a club-hosted steak fry, claiming the defendants owed a duty of reasonable care and were vicariously liable for the driver's negligence based on their membership and event involvement. The district court granted the defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and certified the order as final under Rule 54(b). On appeal, the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the complaint alleged no facts establishing an individual duty of care by the members and that mere membership in a voluntary social association does not create vicarious liability for another member's negligent acts. The court also upheld the certification as proper.

proceduretorts & liability

The case involved a mother's appeal of the termination of her parental rights in her minor child G.R., where she argued that her severe mental health issues prevented her from complying with the required service plan and that the proceedings should have been stayed until those issues were resolved. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court's termination order. The court reasoned that Utah Code section 78-3a-408(2)(a) treats extreme mental illness rendering a parent unable to care for a child as evidence of unfitness, not a defense to termination, and that the strict statutory time limits on reunification services under section 78-3a-312(4)(d) do not permit indefinite delays for resolving mental health issues.

family law

The case involved a defendant charged with DUI and related offenses after a breath test showed a blood alcohol level of .18; he challenged the prosecution's use of calibration certificates for the testing device in place of live testimony from the technician who prepared them. The trial court denied the defendant's motion in limine and allowed the documents into evidence under Utah Code section 41-6a-515. On interlocutory appeal, the court affirmed, ruling that the certificates were nontestimonial hearsay in the form of business records and therefore admissible without violating the Sixth Amendment confrontation right under Crawford v. Washington, and that the statute permitting their use was constitutional.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Deon Clopten's appeal of his convictions for murder, failure to respond to a police command, and possession of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person, arising from the shooting death of Tony Fuailemaa outside a Salt Lake City concert venue based on multiple eyewitness accounts. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions in full. It held that the trial court acted within its discretion by excluding defense-proffered expert testimony on the fallibility of eyewitness identification, because a standard Long jury instruction on the topic was given and precedent treats such expert evidence as potentially cumulative.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves a divorce proceeding initiated by Wife in 2002, during which Husband's counsel withdrew and a Confession of Judgment was later filed with the court regarding payments from the sale of marital assets. Wife obtained default judgments and garnishment orders after Husband did not appear at hearings, leading Husband to file a motion to set aside the confession and judgments on grounds including a violation of Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 74 (requiring notice to appear or appoint counsel after withdrawal) and lack of validity due to no meeting of the minds. The trial court denied the motion as procedurally improper and based on prior rulings, and the appellate court affirmed, concluding that Husband waived the rule 74 argument by failing to raise it when his counsel reappeared and that his other challenges were not preserved, inadequately briefed, or supported by marshaled evidence.

family lawprocedure

This case involved 14th Street Gym, a business licensed by Salt Lake City that caters to gay males, appealing the city's revocation of its business license following incidents of lewd conduct by patrons. The district court upheld the revocation on summary judgment, but the Utah Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the city's action was arbitrary and capricious. The core reasoning was that the 2005 hearing order, which set conditions for provisional operation and potential revocation, required some finding of culpability or knowledge by the gym or its employees for violations, yet the 2006 revocation was based solely on the acts of third-party patrons without any such finding. The court remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion, without addressing other claims raised by the gym.

business & regulatory

In this case, Leigh Young sued her insurer, Fire Insurance Exchange, for breach of contract and bad faith after the company denied her claim for fire damage to her home, concluding it was arson. The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurer on the bad faith claim, finding it fairly debatable, and later directed a verdict against Young on the breach of contract claim. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment on bad faith but reversed the directed verdict, holding that Young had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case without needing expert testimony and that the trial court erred in excluding her expert witness, remanding for further proceedings.

business & regulatorypropertytorts & liability

In State v. Martinez, the defendant appealed his drug conviction and the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained after a traffic stop, arguing that police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle in which he was a passenger. The court affirmed the trial court's rulings, holding that the stop was justified under the Fourth Amendment and Utah law. The core reasoning was that the officer had specific and articulable facts supporting reasonable suspicion, including the passengers matching a description of suspicious individuals reported at a convenience store, their evasive behavior, and the vehicle's similarity to those used in recent area robberies involving similar suspects.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

The case involved James Robert Scott, who pleaded guilty to three counts of sodomy on a child for sexually abusing his girlfriend's six-year-old daughter over the course of a year. Scott appealed his sentence of three consecutive ten-years-to-life prison terms, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to correct an alleged inaccuracy in the diagnostic evaluation about whether he had tested positive for chlamydia and by considering inappropriate factors such as his own history of abuse. The Utah Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not fulfill its duty under Utah Code section 77-18-1(6)(a) to make findings on the record about the accuracy and relevance of the contested information in the presentencing report, and remanded for compliance with that requirement. The court otherwise affirmed the sentence, concluding that other evidence in the record supported it and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evaluating the remaining factors.

criminal lawprocedure

In a dispute arising from the sale of an automobile dealership under an Asset Sale Agreement, Coet sued Labrum for breach related to a 1992 Ford truck and sought attorney fees, while Labrum counterclaimed regarding obsolete parts. The trial court granted partial summary judgment to Labrum barring Coet's claims for attorney fees and prejudgment interest based on a release, determined Labrum was the prevailing party after trial on remaining claims, and ruled that Labrum was not liable for obsolete parts and that the truck was included in the sale. The appellate court affirmed these rulings, concluding that the release was unambiguous, the prevailing party finding was supported, and the trial court's factual determinations on the parts and truck were not clearly erroneous.

business & regulatoryproperty

This case arose from a long-running dispute in which plaintiffs challenged Salt Lake County's approval of a shopping center expansion that violated local zoning ordinances and a conditional use permit; after prevailing on the merits in two prior appeals, plaintiffs sought an award of attorney fees. The trial court denied the request, concluding that the private attorney general doctrine did not apply and that the court lacked inherent equitable authority to award fees. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the doctrine applied because the litigation enforced important public rights concerning compliance with land-use laws, that the County was not immune under the Governmental Immunity Act, and that the County Land Use Development and Management Act did not preclude an award of fees; the matter was remanded for calculation of reasonable fees. The court reviewed the fee issue de novo and clarified that the statutory list of remedies was non-exclusive.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

In this case, plaintiff James Fennell sued the developers and builder of his home after a 1998 landslide on the property reduced its value, claiming intentional and negligent failure to disclose known risks based on a prior soils report and breach of implied warranty. The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants Green, Wall, and Ivory North, citing Fennell's failure to comply with a local rule on opposing summary judgment facts, lack of evidence that defendants knew of landslide susceptibility on lot 31, the economic loss rule barring recovery for purely economic damages, and Utah's non-recognition of implied warranties in residential property sales. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, upholding the procedural default and the substantive bars to the claims under existing state law.

propertyproceduretorts & liability

The case involved a juvenile, P.S., who during a traffic stop provided police with a false name and date of birth and signed the citation using that fictitious name. The juvenile court initially adjudicated P.S. for forgery under Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-501 but later amended the ruling to falsification of government records under § 76-8-511, concluding there was no purpose to defraud and that the forgery statute's placement under property offenses limited its application. The Utah Court of Appeals reversed, holding that a traffic citation qualifies as a government-issued writing under the forgery statute and that signing it with a false name to avoid liability demonstrates the requisite intent to defraud by gaining an advantage.

criminal law

This case involved a juvenile court adjudication where the State alleged that Mother abused T.A., resulting in his death, and that S.A. was a sibling at risk due to that abuse. Prior to the hearing, the court ordered Father to obtain separate counsel and ruled that he was not a party to the adjudication, limiting his counsel's role to rehabilitating Father as a witness and barring participation such as presenting evidence or cross-examining witnesses. Father appealed, claiming a violation of his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and Utah statutes granting parents rights to counsel and to present evidence in proceedings affecting parental rights. The Utah Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Father possessed protected liberty interests in his family relationship and custody of S.A., and that state law mandated parental participation, requiring remand for full participation by both parents in the adjudication hearing.

family lawprocedurecriminal law

This case involves a dispute between Brighton Corporation and Gregory Ward over restrictive covenants in a deed governing a parcel of family-owned land in Brighton, Utah, where the corporation sought to block Ward from constructing a cabin without approved plans. The trial court granted partial summary judgment allowing the corporation to impose conditions like architect certification and fee reimbursement for plan review, enforced a settlement agreement between the parties, and excluded certain expert testimony, among other rulings. On appeal, the court affirmed that the settlement agreement was binding and enforceable based on the parties' sworn statements and that FCOZ compliance and architect requirements were incorporated into it. However, it reversed the award of attorney fees because reasonableness is not a legal basis for such fees, reversed permission to pave a road in violation of the agreement, and held that the trial court should have reviewed all submitted plans and allowed expert testimony on the reasonableness of the corporation's approval decisions under the covenant before remanding for further proceedings.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a boundary dispute over land in Sanpete County, Utah, where plaintiffs sought to quiet title to the eastern halves of sections 18 and 24 based on a fence that had separated properties since at least 1929. Defendants, who acquired lots in a subdivision to the west of the fence via special warranty deeds or tax deeds, argued that surveys showed the subdivision encroaching on plaintiffs' land. The trial court granted summary judgment to cross-defendants Formen and Backman and, after a bench trial, quieted title in favor of plaintiffs. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the elements of boundary by acquiescence were met due to the fence's long visibility, straight alignment, and use by adjoining owners as the property line for decades without objection. The court also ruled that the defendants' deed claims failed as a matter of law because the boundary dispute predated their acquisitions and merged into their deeds.

property