Free Legal Help in Utah

Bonnie & Hyde, Inc. v. Lynch, 2013 UT App 153, 305 P.3d 196

Where someone holds another person's property only by that person's consent, refusing to return it after the owner demands it back is conversion — independent of any dispute over the right to occupy the premises.

Cited on: Recovering Belongings After Being Locked Out by a Relative · Access to Belongings and Rent Credit After an Apartment Fire

Meyer v. Aposhian, 2016 UT App 47, 369 P.3d 1284

The petitioner bears the burden of proving abuse or domestic violence at a protective order hearing, and failure to meet it means the order is denied.

Cited on: Defending Against a Child Protective Order With Limited Means · Seeking a Protective Order Against an Abusive Parent

A.W. v. Marelli, 2024 UT App 8, 543 P.3d 786

Utah's bar for 'extreme and outrageous conduct' in an intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim is demanding, and a court may decide the question as a matter of law where reasonable minds could not differ; more than a decade of unwelcome, repeated, and expressly rejected contact — letters, gifts, Facebook messages, and a couple of unwanted visits, considered as a single course of conduct — was held not to rise to the required level of outrage.

Cited on: Civil Claim Against a Harassing Neighbor After a Noise Complaint

Aris Vision Institute, Inc. v. Wasatch Property Management, Inc., 2006 UT 45, 143 P.3d 278

Under Utah's forcible entry and detainer statute, all damages directly and proximately resulting from a forcible entry or a forcible or unlawful detainer must be trebled — including loss, damage, and depreciation of the occupant's personal property that the possessor withheld.

Cited on: Removing an Off-Lease Occupant — What the Leaseholders' Exposure Looks Like

Bountiful City v. Swenson, 2024 UT App 133, 557 P.3d 1158

A protective order is enforced according to its own specific terms, so conduct the order's wording does not actually prohibit cannot be punished as a violation.

Cited on: Whether a 'No Parent-Time' Provision Bars Phone and Video Contact With a Child

CCW Ranch, LLC v. Nielsen, 2012 UT App 205, 283 P.3d 1072

Utah's boundary/partition fence cost-sharing statute does not obligate an ordinary residential neighbor to fund half a new fence, while an informal agreement between adjoining owners about fence sections is enforceable.

Cited on: Who Pays to Replace a Deteriorating Shared Boundary Fence

Carlsen v. Board of Adjustment of the City of Smithfield, 2012 UT App 260, 287 P.3d 440

A pre-existing animal-keeping use can be maintained as a legal nonconforming use, and such determinations are made by the local board of adjustment and upheld on review if supported by substantial evidence.

Cited on: Neighbor Demands Removal of Grandfathered Horses Over Fly Complaints

Commercial Real Estate Investment, L.C. v. Comcast of Utah II, Inc., 2012 UT 49, 285 P.3d 1193

Utah does not subject liquidated damages clauses to any form of heightened judicial scrutiny. The Utah Supreme Court expressly rejected the competing approaches its earlier cases had used — the penalty inquiry, the 'shock the conscience' comparison of liquidated to actual damages, and the two-part Restatement of Contracts section 339 reasonable-forecast/difficult-to-estimate test — and held that such clauses are reviewed like any other contractual provision, beginning with a presumption of enforceability and invalidated only on ordinary contract grounds, chiefly unconscionability assessed as of the time of contract formation. The party challenging the clause bears the burden.

Cited on: Is a $1,500 'No-Show' Penalty in a 1099 Contract Enforceable?

Cooper v. Dressel, 2016 UT App 246, 391 P.3d 338

Substitute service under Utah R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1)(A) is valid only if the papers are left at the respondent's actual dwelling with someone who resides there; a mail-forwarding or non-residence address makes service defective.

Cited on: When Someone Else in the Household Can Accept Service of Divorce Papers

Haggis Management, Inc. v. Turtle Management, Inc., 745 P.2d 442 (Utah 1985)

A secured party that fails to dispose of repossessed collateral in a commercially reasonable manner is barred from recovering a deficiency judgment against the guarantors of the secured note.

Cited on: Can Your Co-Signer Sue You for the Balance on a Repossessed Car?

Helf v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 2015 UT 81, 361 P.3d 63

Utah recognizes a narrow intentional-tort exception to workers'-compensation exclusivity that requires proof the employer (through a manager or supervisor with the relevant authority) subjectively knew or expected that the injury would occur — the Utah Supreme Court framed this as knowledge that injury was virtually certain to result — and that knowledge may be inferred from circumstantial evidence; separately, an employee who accepts workers'-compensation benefits is not barred by election of remedies from also pursuing the intentional-tort claim.

Cited on: Suing an Employer After a Workplace Altercation With a Coworker

Hess v. Johnston, 2007 UT App 213, 163 P.3d 747

Utah has not decided whether a donor may recover engagement-period gifts on a conditional-gift theory — Hess expressly reserved the question. What the court did hold is that Utah will not imply a condition of marriage on every gift given during an engagement, and that a donor asserting a conditional gift bears the burden of establishing the condition from an express declaration made at the time of the gift, from the surrounding circumstances, or from the inherent nature of the gift itself; a donor's after-the-fact 'I would not have given it but for the engagement' is not enough, because the reason for a gift is not the same as an intent that it be revocable.

Cited on: Recovering an Engagement Ring After a Broken Engagement

Housing Authority of Salt Lake City v. Delgado, 914 P.2d 1163

A tenant who acted in good faith and paid what was within her control substantially complies with the lease and is relieved from forfeiting the tenancy over the shortfall.

Cited on: Eviction for Back Rent When Rental Assistance Never Paid

Jolley v. Corry, 671 P.2d 139

Co-owners of Utah property stand in a relationship of trust and confidence with one another, so one co-owner cannot use her own default to extinguish the others' interests.

Cited on: Recovering a Down Payment in a Co-Owned Home Dispute

Jones v. MacKey Price Thompson & Ostler, 2015 UT 60, 355 P.3d 1000

A person who actually performed services can recover the reasonable value of that work even where the parties dispute the terms of an unwritten deal.

Cited on: Defending a Demand to Repay Funds Under an Oral Work Agreement

Law v. Siegel, 571 U.S. 415

Once homestead equity is properly claimed as exempt, a bankruptcy court cannot surcharge that exempt property to pay the trustee's administrative expenses.

Cited on: Bankruptcy Options to Stop Foreclosure and Debt Collection

Layton City v. Stevenson, 2014 UT 37, 337 P.3d 242

A plea in abeyance can be terminated on proof of the underlying misconduct by a preponderance of the evidence; the State need not obtain a conviction to show a 'no violations of law' condition was breached.

Cited on: Vehicle Search and Plea-in-Abeyance Violation Risk

Mackey v. Krause, 2025 UT 37

A person who reports observed or suspected misconduct can raise privilege as a defense to a resulting defamation claim, and where the defendant files a special motion under Utah's Uniform Public Expression Protection Act the burden shifts to the plaintiff to point to evidence making a prima facie case that the statements were not privileged, or that the defendant abused the privilege, before the defamation claim may proceed.

Cited on: Recourse for a False Workplace Report of a Weapons Violation

Martin v. Kristensen, 2021 UT 17, 489 P.3d 198

An occupant permitted to live in a home without paying rent is classified as a tenant at will, and the owner must serve the statutory notice to quit and proceed by judicial process rather than self-help before removing her.

Cited on: Notice Owed to a Rent-Free Occupant When the Property Sells

Morgan v. Secretary of Housing & Urban Development, 985 F.2d 1451 (10th Cir. 1993)

A blanket 'adults only' / no-children park or building rule, applied to withhold approval of a prospective tenant or purchaser because the household includes a child under 18, is unlawful familial-status discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 3604, and the owner's ignorance that the familial-status amendments had taken effect does not defeat liability.

Cited on: A Landlord's No-Children Policy Versus Stepchild Visitation

P.H. Investment v. Oliver, 818 P.2d 1018

A tenant need not vacate to raise a habitability breach and may assert it as both a defense and a counterclaim within the unlawful detainer action.

Cited on: Contesting a Three-Day Eviction Notice Over Black Mold

Rebein v. Cornerstone Creek Partners, LLC, 842 F.3d 1293

A pre-bankruptcy transfer can be avoided under 11 U.S.C. 548 where the transferor did not receive reasonably equivalent value, so removing a name from title before a filing carries real risk.

Cited on: Removing a Name From a Vehicle Title Before a Possible Bankruptcy

Scott v. Benson, 2023 UT 4, 529 P.3d 319

Even where a voluntary declaration of paternity is set aside for fraud or mutual mistake, the Utah Uniform Parentage Act still permits a court to adjudicate the acknowledged, non-biological father as the child's legal father rather than automatically restoring biological parentage, applying the statutory factors in Utah Code 81-5-608 (renumbered from 78B-15-608 in 2024) governing when to disregard genetic test results.

Cited on: Challenging Paternity Five Years After Signing a Declaration

Smith v. Batchelor, 832 P.2d 467

An employee whose earned wages are withheld can recover the wages together with the statutory penalty under Utah Code § 34-28-5.

Cited on: Best Approach When an Employer Takes Back a Final Paycheck

State v. Timmerman, 2009 UT 58, 218 P.3d 590

Under Utah Code 76-1-302 a criminal prosecution is timely if it is commenced within the limitations period, with commencement occurring on the filing of an information or complaint rather than on arrest or service of the warrant.

Cited on: Resolving an Unexpected Warrant for Domestic Violence Assault

Stone v. M & M Welding & Construction, Inc., 2013 UT App 233, 312 P.3d 934

Utah recognizes a common-law wrongful-discharge claim under the public-policy exception to at-will employment for an employee fired in retaliation for exercising workers' compensation rights, and that claim reaches an employee discharged because he was about to file a claim rather than only one who had already filed; summary judgment for the employer was reversed and the case remanded.

Cited on: Workers' Compensation and Termination After a Work Injury

Syme v. Symphony Grp. LLC, 2018 UT App 212, 437 P.3d 576

A forfeiture provision is not self-executing: a party cannot keep a deposit unless the specific event the clause says triggers forfeiture actually occurred — so a landlord with no lease and no clause at all is on weaker footing.

Cited on: Deposit Forfeiture When a Prospective Tenant Never Moves In

Thompson v. Clark, 596 U.S. 36

A dismissal satisfies the favorable-termination element of a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983 — the plaintiff need only show the prosecution ended without a conviction, with no affirmative indication of innocence required.

Cited on: Filing a Civil Suit for Unlawful Arrest After Charges Were Dismissed

United States v. Shrum, 908 F.3d 1219

A warrantless seizure of property or premises is itself unreasonable, and consent obtained while the unlawful seizure continues does not cure it.

Cited on: Suppressing Evidence in a Restricted-Person Firearm Case

Wayment v. Clear Channel Broadcasting, Inc., 2005 UT 25, 116 P.3d 271

Utah defamation requires falsity as an element, and a qualified privilege covers an employer's communications about a former employee and the circumstances of departure.

Cited on: Former Employer Disclosing the Reason for Termination to a New Employer

Woodhaven Apartments v. Washington, 942 P.2d 918 (Utah 1997)

A landlord's early-lease-termination fee is a liquidated damages provision and is enforceable only if the amount was, at the time the lease was signed, a reasonable forecast of just compensation for the harm the early termination would cause (Restatement of Contracts § 339). Where the record contains no evidence of the time and costs the landlord could anticipate incurring on an early re-let, a finding that the fee was reasonable is clearly erroneous and the fee operates as an unenforceable penalty. A termination fee that duplicates cost items already covered elsewhere in the lease — such as a separate nonrefundable cleaning or redecorating fee, or rent for the vacancy period — is unenforceable to that extent.

Cited on: Disputed Early Lease Termination Fees With No Specified Due Date

Young v. Colorado Department of Corrections, 94 F.4th 1242

The ADA protects workers who are only "regarded as" impaired, but that status generally does not entitle them to a reasonable accommodation.

Cited on: Hostile Work Environment and Disability Discrimination After a False Medication-Misuse Accusation