Utah Law Developments
| Jurisdiction | Utah,United States |
| Citation | Vol. 31 No. 2 Pg. 36 |
| Pages | 36 |
| Publication year | 2018 |
March, 2018
Appellate Highlights
Rodney R. Parker, Dani N. Cepernich, Scott A. Elder, Nathanael J. Mitchell, and Adam M. Pace
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.
A.S. v. R.S., 2017 UT 77 (Nov. 14, 2017)
The Utah Supreme Court dismissed this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. The timeliness of the notice of appeal hinged on the timeliness of a Rule 59 motion for new trial, which appellant relied on to toll the time for appeal. Appellant had filed his memorandum in support just before midnight on the deadline to do so, but the motion was not filed until just after midnight the following day. Utah’s electronic filing system and its guidelines establish that the filing date and time is when a filing is received and posted in the electronic system, even if there are technical difficulties that created a delay from the actual filing. The court held that the motion filed shortly after midnight was untimely, even though the memorandum was filed before midnight. The memorandum did not constitute a “motion”; and Rule 6(b)(2) prohibited the district court from extending the time for father to file his Rule 59 motion.
Porenta v. Porenta, 2017 UT 78 (Nov. 15, 2017)
In the midst of divorce proceedings, Husband transferred the couple’s marital home to his mother, intending to void Wife’s claim to the home. Before the divorce was finalized, Husband died. At trial, the court held that the transfer was fraudulent, and awarded the home to Wife. Mother appealed, arguing there was no ongoing debtor-creditor relationship as required under the Utah Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) as this relationship was extinguished upon Husband’s death. Affirming the trial court’s holding, the Utah Supreme Court held that although the UFTA does require an ongoing debtor-creditor relationship, the death of a spouse during a divorce proceeding does not abate the action in regards to property rights that have been determined by the court, and therefore the debtor-creditor relationship was not extinguished upon Husband’s death, and the claim survived against Husband’s estate.
In re R.G., 2017 UT 79 (Nov. 15, 2017)
Two juvenile defendants accused of aggravated sexual assault appealed the denial of a motion to suppress post-Miranda statements to detective. The supreme court held that the juveniles knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived their Miranda rights, given the totality of the circumstances, even though parents were not present during the interview. In a footnote, the court observed that best practices might include videotaping the interview, notifying parents, inviting a parent to be present, and taking additional steps...
To continue reading
Request your trial