Utah Law Developments

• Publication year: 2022

Utah Law Developments Vol. 35 No. 3 Pg. 25 Utah Bar Journal June, 2022

May, 2022

Appellate Highlights

By Rodney R. Parker, Dani Cepernich, Robert Cummings, Nathanael Mitchell, Adam Pace, and Andrew Roth

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. The following summaries have been prepared by the authoring attorneys listed above, who are solely responsible for their content.

UTAH SUPREME COURT

Zilleruelo v. Commodity Transporters, Inc. 2022 UT 1 (Jan. 20, 2022)

The district court granted summary judgment to the defendant on statute of limitations grounds, concluding that the limitations period was not tolled during the time the plaintiff was mentally incompetent because the plaintiff had signed a power of attorney appointing an agent who could have filed suit on his behalf. On appeal, the court interpreted the tolling statute, Utah Code section 78B-2-108(2), and held that the existence of a legal guardian or preexisting power of attorney has no impact on whether the statute is tolled during the period of incompetency.

Diderickson v. State 2022 UT 2 (Jan. 27, 2022)

On certiorari, the criminal defendants argued the court of appeals erred in affirming the district court’s denial of their motion for satisfaction of judgment and in affirming the district court’s refusal to reduce a restitution order by the amount of a pre-conviction settlement agreement the defendants had reached with the victim. The supreme court rejected the defendants’ argument that private parties should be allowed to enter into settlement agreements that bind courts in criminal cases when setting restitution.

Ahhmigo, LLC v. Synergy Company of Utah 2022 UT 4 (Feb. 3, 2022)

In this appeal from confirmation of an arbitration award, the supreme court held that a party’s brief mention in the lower court of the argument that the arbitrator manifestly disregarded the law by ignoring a stipulation between the parties failed to preserve the issue. The court also summarized its prior treatment of manifest disregard in a discussion that appears to contemplate revisiting the scope of the doctrine in a future case.

State v. Sorbonne 2022 UT 5 (Feb. 3, 2022)

Under Utah Code section 76-2-402(2)(a), an individual is “justified” in “threatening or using force” if he “reasonably believes” the force is necessary for self-defense. Interpreting this statutory provision, the Utah Supreme Court concluded that the statutory requirement of reasonable belief “encompasses both a subjective and an objective component – the defendant must believe the force is necessary and the belief must be reasonable under the relevant circumstances.” The “relevant circumstances” may include, among other things, an alleged victim’s “prior violent acts or violent propensities” and “any patterns of abuse or violence in the parties’ relationship.”

Hills v. Nelson

2022 UT 6 (Feb. 10, 2022)

The court reversed the district court’s order of judicial dissolution of a limited liability company and remanded for further...