The Utah Court of Appeals vacated a wildfire verdict because the jury found two defendants negligent and causally responsible but assigned one of them zero percent fault.
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of contract, defamation, and false-light claims and upheld denial of an unsupported request to amend.
The Utah Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for a police department because factual disputes remained over whether an officer complied with emergency-vehicle requirements.
The Utah Court of Appeals revived negligence claims arising from a bar ejection while affirming sanctions over lost video and an aborted expert deposition.
The Utah Court of Appeals held that sufficient evidence supported a fatal negligent-driving conviction and that any speeding-instruction error was harmless.
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury under Model Utah Jury Instruction CV212 on “violation of a safety law,” holding that voluntary consensus standards from ANSI, ASTM, and the non-adopted portions of the International Building Code are not “safety laws” within the instruction’s meaning—which, under the noscitur a sociis canon and Restatement (Second) of Torts § 288B, is limited to formally codified statutes, ordinances, and administrative rules with the force of law.
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for LM General Insurance on an alternative basis—that an insured’s underinsured motorist claim was fairly debatable as a matter of law—because the insurer diligently investigated, made a timely offer that fairly reflected the inherent uncertainty of general damages, and acted promptly throughout, even though the arbitrator ultimately awarded significantly more.
The Utah Court of Appeals reversed an automobile accident verdict and remanded for a new trial after the trial court misapplied the collateral source rule by excluding evidence of employer-provided workplace accommodations, admitted medical records without proper business-records foundation under Utah R. Evid. 803(6), and improperly excluded life care planner testimony on work-life expectancy based on inconsistencies that went to weight rather than admissibility.