Utah Law Developments

• Publication year: 2016
• Pages: 36

Utah Law Developments Vol. 29 No. 2 Pg. 36 Utah Bar Journal April, 2016

March, 2016

Appellate Highlights

Rodney R. Parker, Dani N. Cepernich, Nathanael J. Mitchell, Adam M. Pace, and Taymour B. Semnani, J.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following appellate cases of interest were recently decided by the Utah Supreme Court, Utah Court of Appeals, and United States Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Westgate Resorts, Ltd. v. Adel 2016 UT 2, 803 Utah Adv. Rep. 52 (Jan. 5, 2016)

The Utah Supreme Court confirmed an arbitration panel’s award of reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party under the Utah Pattern of Unlawful Activity Act, even though the fee award was greater than the amount the party contracted to pay its attorneys. The court held that the arbitration panel did not commit an obvious error in its calculation of reasonable fees because “the UPUAA does not expressly limit a plaintiff’s reasonable attorney fees to those actually incurred.…” Id. ¶ 30 (emphasis added).

State v. Cuttler 2015 UT 95, 802 Utah Adv. Rep. 15 (Dec. 24, 2015)

In this criminal appeal, the Utah Supreme Court extended its holding in State v. Lucero, 2014 UT 15, 328 P.3d 841 to the examination of Rule 404(c) evidence under Rule 403 of the Utah Rules of Evidence. In Lucero, the court had held that while the factors announced in State v. Shickles, 760 P.2d 291 (Utah 1988), may be useful in evaluating whether Rule 404(b) evidence satisfies Rule 403, the plain language of Rule 403 controls and not all Shickles factors need be considered. With this holding, the Cuttler court makes clear that the same analysis applies to Rule 404(c) evidence.

Mind & Motion Utah Investments, LLC v. Celtic Bank Corp. 2016 UT 6 (Jan. 27, 2016)

The court held that a provision in a real estate purchase contract that required a plat to be recorded was unambiguously a mandatory covenant, even though fulfillment of the provision depended on something outside the contracting party’s control, because the parties used explicitly mandatory language to characterize it, while using explicitly conditional language elsewhere in the agreement.

DIRECTV v. Utah State Tax Comm’n 2015 UT 93, 802 Utah Adv. Rep. 20 (Dec. 14, 2015)

Satellite companies brought constitutional challenges against a statute that created a tax credit favoring cable companies. Surveying constitutional jurisprudence, the Utah Supreme Court held the tax credit statute did not trigger strict scrutiny under the dormant Commerce...