Views from the Bench

• Publication year: 2024
• Citation: Vol. 37 No. 4 Pg. 12
• Pages: 12

Views from the Bench Vol. 37 No. 4 Pg. 12 Utah Bar Journal July 2024

Views from the Bench

The Current Status of Justice Court Reform

by The Honorable Paul Farr

The Utah Judiciary's Justice Court Reform Efforts

In the past, municipal courts nationwide have largely been ignored by scholars and even much of the legal community. That has started to change over the past decade. Greater attention is now being focused on these courts that adjudicate a majority of all cases filed in this country and that play such a critical role in our judicial system. Utah's municipal courts, called justice courts, were created in 1989. There have been ongoing efforts to improve and refine these courts since their creation, with significant movement in the last eight years.

In 2016, the Utah Supreme Court began looking into procedural changes involving the justice courts. This work resulted in the court, in coordination with the Utah Judicial Council, creating a joint Task Force in 2019. The primary charge of the Task Force was to identify a path to eliminate de novo appeals to the district court, and to do so without the need for a constitutional amendment, if possible.

The Task Force worked for approximately two years, and in August of 2021, presented its final Report and Recommendations (the Report) to the Utah Supreme Court and Utah Judicial Council. The full Report is available here: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/utc/jc-reform/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2021/09/Reform-Proposal-Final.pdf.

The Report recommended the creation of a division within the district court where misdemeanor and small claims cases would be heard "on the record" by new division judges. It also recommended leaving justice courts in place to handle traffic cases and other infractions. This proposal would result in the elimination of de novo appeals for small claims and misdemeanor cases, but by leaving the justice courts in place it would not require a constitutional amendment to enact. The Task Force and the Judicial Council envisioned a gradual state-wide process where, for example, changes would be implemented over a number of years to transfer cases as division judges were funded, justice courts were consolidated, and justice court judges retired.

Following the presentation of the Report, the Judicial Council began to study how the recommended reforms could be implemented, and also reached out to the legislature, which was largely receptive to the recommendations.

House Bill 210 (2023)

In the 2023 General Session, the legislature passed House Bill 210. This bill adopted several of the Report's recommendations that were able to be implemented without significant cost or structural changes. This included the following:

Enacting language clarifying that justice courts, while sponsored by local government, are part of the state judiciary, and not a department of local government.

While this has always been the judiciary's position, there had been some confusion with local governments.

Narrowing the range in which a local government must set a justice court judge's salary. Previously a justice court judge's salary was required to be between 50% and 90% of a district court judge's salary. This bill narrowed that range to 70% to 90%. The Report recommended eliminating the range and setting a fixed salary at 90%. This issue is not about money, but judicial independence. The Judiciary believes it is inappropriate and creates potential conflicts when a judge has to negotiate his or her salary with the sponsoring entity.

Providing that applicants throughout the state may apply for a justice court judge position if they relocate to the county, adjacent county, or judicial district upon appointment. Previously, an applicant had to already live in the county or adjacent county to be eligible to apply. It is hoped that this will increase the pool of qualified applicants.

JUDGE PAUL FARR is a justice court judge serving in Sandy City and the Town of Alta. He...