Leonard H. Russon

The case involved John Vincent Pritchett's appeal of his conviction for aggravated sexual abuse of a child, based on allegations by a nine-year-old girl that he had penetrated her vagina with his fingers during a visit to her home. Pritchett denied the claims, and the defense raised issues at trial and on appeal regarding the admission of testimony about the child's changed behavior after the incident, the use of a preliminary hearing transcript to refresh the child's memory, the denial of a mistrial motion, and the constitutionality of a Utah sentencing statute under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, concluding that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or in denying the mistrial and that the statute was not unconstitutional.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved the parents and estate of eleven-year-old Michael Kouris suing the Utah Highway Patrol, the State of Utah, and Trooper Cortland Childs for wrongful death after Childs' patrol car struck and killed Michael on his bicycle while Childs was responding to an emergency radio call about a child in a car trunk. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on the remaining negligence claims, finding no disputed material facts and holding that governmental immunity barred the suit under the Utah Governmental Immunity Act because Childs was operating an authorized emergency vehicle with its visual signals activated. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the statutory emergency vehicle exception to the waiver of immunity applied when the required signals were in use, even though the collision occurred outside a crosswalk during the trooper's attempt to pass another vehicle. A dissent argued that the majority's reading of the visibility requirement for signals imposed an unworkable standard not supported by the statutory text.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case concerned Tom Snyder's lawsuit against Murray City Corporation after the city refused to allow him to deliver a proposed opening prayer at a municipal council meeting. Snyder had submitted a satirical prayer that criticized religion and politicians, which the city attorney rejected for violating guidelines against mocking policies or expressing political views. Snyder claimed violations of his rights under the Utah Constitution, including free exercise of religion, establishment of religion, free speech, and due process. The Utah Supreme Court reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the city, holding that the denial implicated protections under article I, sections 4, 7, and 15 of the Utah Constitution and that the claims were not barred by res judicata or the statute of limitations.

free speechreligious libertycivil rights

This case involves David Bennett's lawsuit against law firms Jones Waldo and Post Kirby, along with several partners, asserting claims for legal malpractice through breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, abuse of process, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and deceit, all arising from the firms' representation of Bennett in a federal securities class action against Gen-Probe. Bennett appealed the trial court's dismissals of his fourth amended complaint. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the Jones Waldo defendants' motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(6) was properly granted because Bennett failed to plead cognizable damages or other required elements for the malpractice and related claims, certain claims were barred by the statute of limitations, and the Post Kirby defendants' motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(2) was properly granted due to lack of personal jurisdiction over the California-based firm and attorney.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved Pinetree Associates, the owners of thirty condominium units in a single structure served by one water meter and line, suing Ephraim City to recover alleged overcharges after the city began assessing thirty separate minimum monthly water fees under a 1991 rate resolution instead of a single fee. The trial court granted summary judgment to Pinetree on claims that the city's charging policy violated the resolution and the uniform operation of laws provision of the Utah Constitution, ordering an accounting for refunds, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that the resolution's plain language requires the minimum rate to be assessed per customer based on water measured through the meter or line, so a single meter serving one structure means only one charge applies. The court rejected the city's challenges to the supporting affidavits, noting that the key facts were stipulated by the parties and no timely objection had been raised below.

business & regulatoryproperty

In State v. Schofield, the defendant was charged in district court with multiple first-degree felonies for alleged child sexual abuse that occurred when he was a minor; he moved to dismiss, claiming the juvenile court had exclusive jurisdiction. The district court denied the motion, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed on interlocutory review. The court interpreted Utah Code Ann. § 78-3a-104(1)(a) to limit juvenile court jurisdiction to offenders who are under age twenty-one when proceedings begin, placing Schofield outside that class because he was over twenty-two at filing. The opinion further held that the statute's age-based distinction satisfies the uniform operation of laws clause of the Utah Constitution and that the district court possesses original jurisdiction over all criminal matters not statutorily assigned elsewhere.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Luis Pena-Flores, who was convicted under Utah Code Ann. § 76-8-305 of interfering with peace officers by encouraging gang members not to comply with their detention and photographing at a carnival as part of a gang interdiction effort. Pena-Flores argued on appeal that his conviction should be overturned because the underlying detentions lacked reasonable suspicion and were therefore unlawful. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the statute applies when officers are seeking to effect a detention that has the indicia of being lawful, even if it is later determined to be unlawful. The court's reasoning relied on the plain language of the statute, including the phrase "seeking to effect," and prior precedent such as State v. Gardiner, which rejected the common-law right to resist an arrest.

criminal law

In State v. Gomez, the defendant was convicted of rape after a jury trial and appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by quashing his subpoena for records from a rape crisis center without an in camera review and by barring cross-examination of the victim about her alleged use of a false ID to drink underage. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. It held that the Confidential Communications for Sexual Assault Act creates an absolute privilege for such records with no exception allowing review or disclosure, and that the trial court properly exercised discretion under evidence rules to exclude the cross-examination because its minimal probative value on credibility was substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice. The court declined to address constitutional claims that were inadequately briefed.

criminal lawprocedure

Atlas Steel challenged a Utah State Tax Commission ruling that its purchases of a shredding system and related equipment were subject to sales and use tax, claiming exemption under Utah Code Ann. § 59-12-104(15) as a manufacturing facility described in SIC Codes 2000-3999. The Commission determined Atlas was primarily engaged in scrap processing best described by SIC Code 5093 and thus ineligible for the exemption. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the statute incorporates the SIC Manual's classification system based on an establishment's primary activity and that Atlas's operations did not qualify as manufacturing under the referenced codes.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

In State v. Bowers, the defendant appealed his convictions for possession of a controlled substance within a drug-free zone and possession of drug paraphernalia within a drug-free zone after a jury trial. The State moved to dismiss the appeal on grounds that the notice of appeal was filed too late. The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the 30-day period to file a notice of appeal runs from the date of entry of the sentence, which constitutes the final judgment in a criminal case, and that this period is jurisdictional and cannot be enlarged. Bowers's sentence was entered on December 29, 2000, making the deadline January 29, 2001, but he filed on February 12, 2001.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Jack Trane's conviction for possession of a controlled substance after cocaine was discovered in his sock during a search at jail following his arrest. Trane had been stopped by police responding to a complaint at a convenience store, where officers observed signs of intoxication and disruptive behavior; he refused a frisk, physically resisted arrest for interfering with a peace officer, and was subdued and taken into custody. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals' decision upholding the trial court's denial of Trane's motion to suppress the evidence, holding that the officers had probable cause for arrest based on Trane's resistance and that the subsequent search was justified by exigent circumstances including officer safety.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute between Wilson Supply, Inc., a retailer doing business as Pro Power Equipment Company, and Fradan Manufacturing Corporation, its supplier of yard and garden equipment. After Wilson Supply terminated their unwritten agreement in 1997 and requested that Fradan repurchase its remaining inventory under Utah's Equipment Repurchase from Retail Dealers statute, Fradan refused. Wilson Supply sued to enforce the statute, and following an evidentiary hearing on cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court found Wilson Supply qualified as a dealer and ordered Fradan to repurchase the inventory. On appeal, the Utah Supreme Court affirmed, treating the hearing as a trial on the merits, upholding the factual findings as supported by evidence, and confirming that the buy-back statute applied. The court rejected Fradan's additional arguments regarding the sufficiency of evidence, changes in Wilson Supply's business status, and alleged judicial bias.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved the City of Monticello's exercise of a contractual option to repurchase its electrical power distribution system from Empire Electric Association, Inc., after a 1979 franchise agreement, along with residents' petitions for a referendum on the repurchase and the city's issuance of bonds to finance it. Residents challenged the city's refusal to hold a referendum, arguing it was a legislative matter subject to voter approval, and alleged violations of the Utah Municipal Bond Act in the bond process. The trial court granted summary judgment to the city on both issues. The Utah Supreme Court reversed on the referendum claim, ruling that the petition was not time-barred and that a referendum would not violate the contracts clauses of the U.S. and Utah Constitutions because the repurchase decision was legislative rather than purely administrative, and affirmed summary judgment for the city on the bond act claim because the city provided adequate public notice of the bond terms.

electionsbusiness & regulatoryprocedure

The case concerned a challenge by sponsors of the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act initiative to Utah's statutory requirement that initiative petitions gather signatures from at least 20 of the state's 29 counties (at 10% of each county's gubernatorial vote total) in addition to a statewide total. Petitioners sought an extraordinary writ declaring the multi-county distribution rule unconstitutional and compelling the lieutenant governor to place the measure on the 2002 ballot after they had collected more than enough signatures overall. The Utah Supreme Court granted the writ, holding the county-distribution requirement unconstitutional under the uniform operation of laws provision of the Utah Constitution because it disproportionately burdens the initiative rights of voters in more populous counties. The court reasoned that the rule creates an impermissible geographic classification that dilutes urban votes and lacks a sufficient relation to any legitimate state interest in ensuring broad geographic support.

electionscivil rights

The case concerned a dispute over a financial transaction in which Susan Soliz, a personal injury victim entitled to periodic payments under a structured settlement agreement containing an anti-assignment clause, transferred her interest in those future payments to WebBank in exchange for a lump-sum payment, secured by the payments as collateral. WebBank sought a declaratory judgment that the transaction was a loan governed by Article 9 of the UCC, which would render the anti-assignment provision ineffective, while American General, the entity obligated to make the payments, contended it was a sale or assignment that would trigger the clause and invalidate the transfer. The trial court granted summary judgment to WebBank on the grounds that the transaction was a loan as a matter of law. The Utah Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the determination of whether the parties intended to create a loan or a sale presents a question of fact that cannot be resolved on summary judgment.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

In State v. HCIC, the Utah Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR), a shareholder in the Huntington-Cleveland Irrigation Company (HCIC), sued to challenge HCIC's reclassification of DWR's shares as municipal and industrial use, which resulted in higher annual assessments and reduced voting rights based on DWR's wildlife forage activities. The trial court dismissed the complaint, ruling that statutes of limitations for implied contract and statutory claims had expired because the underlying amendments to HCIC's articles and bylaws occurred by 1995. The Utah Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that DWR's complaint properly challenged the specific annual assessments levied against it rather than solely the initial corporate changes, so the limitations periods did not bar the action. The court reasoned that each assessment created a new basis for claims and that notice pleading allowed the suit to proceed on those grounds.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

The case concerned an LLC formed to develop real estate, where the designated manager secretly entered into a $25,000 loan agreement with Mount Olympus Financial secured by the LLC's property, despite an operating agreement requiring member approval for loans; the manager misappropriated the funds, the LLC defaulted, and the lender foreclosed. Other LLC members sued the lender for declaratory relief invalidating the loan and foreclosure, negligence in failing to verify the manager's authority, and partition. The trial court dismissed the claims, the court of appeals affirmed, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed on certiorari, ruling that Utah Code section 48-2b-127(2) makes loan documents executed by an LLC manager valid and binding on the LLC without additional inquiry or authorization requirements, and that this specific statute controls over the general provision in section 48-2b-125(2)(b).

business & regulatoryproperty

The case involved Garrett Prince suing Bear River Mutual Insurance Company after the insurer denied additional personal injury protection (PIP) benefits under an auto policy for chiropractic treatment beyond 12 weeks following a 1995 accident, based on a retained doctor's report that further care was unnecessary and palliative. Prince asserted claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, and violation of public policy under Utah's No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. The trial court granted Bear River partial summary judgment on all claims except breach of contract, which was later resolved when Bear River paid the $3,000 policy limit plus statutory interest; the court awarded Prince $450 in attorney fees and dismissed the action. On appeal, the Utah Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the denial was permissible under the policy and Act because the claim was fairly debatable based on the medical examination, and that summary judgment was proper on the remaining causes of action.

business & regulatorytorts & liabilityprocedure

This case involves the criminal convictions of Andrew Fedorowicz for felony murder, child abuse, and sexual abuse of a child, stemming from the death of three-year-old Rebecca Bluff while she and her family stayed with the defendant in Utah. The defendant appealed, challenging the admission of certain evidence such as statements, physical items like whips and belts, a videotape, and medical testimony, as well as jury instructions on felony murder and child abuse homicide, the non-merger of convictions, and consecutive sentencing. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, concluding that the trial court properly admitted the evidence, correctly instructed the jury, found no merger of offenses, and did not abuse its discretion in sentencing, based on facts viewed in the light most favorable to the jury verdict including extensive bruising, hypothermia, and the defendant's admissions.

criminal law

In Bakowski v. Mountain States Steel, Inc., the case centered on a commercial lease between Mountain States and Voest-Alpine under which Voest-Alpine was required to obtain insurance covering both parties but failed to do so before taking possession; two Voest-Alpine employees were injured while assisting with lease-required improvements, leading Mountain States to settle their tort claims through its own insurers and then sue Voest-Alpine for breach of contract and indemnification. The trial court initially ruled for Mountain States but later granted summary judgment to Voest-Alpine. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the lease term began on the specified date, the waiver of subrogation clause in the lease barred Mountain States' recovery claims, and the trial court properly exercised discretion in denying Voest-Alpine's request for additional attorney fees.

business & regulatorypropertytorts & liability