Rules of Civil Procedure
URCP083. AMEND. The proposed amendments would bring represented parties into the rule’s purview. They would also permit any court to rely on another court’s vexatious litigant findings and order their own restrictions.
Rules Governing Constitutional Challenges
The following amendments to Civil Rule 24,Criminal Rule 12, and Appellate Rule 25A are intended to better coordinate the provisions addressing constitutional challenges. The amendments do the following:
- Address service on the Attorney General and other governmental entities;
- Broaden the kinds of challenges that may arise;
- Clarify that it is the governmental entity that responds, not the county or municipal attorney (which can be a contracted position in certain jurisdictions);
- Eliminate outdated language in Civil Rule 24 in favor of the updated federal language;
- Clarify in each rule the process and timing for the Attorney General or other governmental entity to respond to a constitutional challenge; and
- Eliminate the requirement in Appellate Rule 25A that the Attorney General state the reasons for declining to file an amicus brief.
URCP024 – Redline and URCP024 – Clean
URCrP012 – Redline
URAP025A – Redline
Rules of Professional Conduct
RPC05.04. Professional Independence of a Lawyer. AMEND. Adds a clarifying comment to the rule.
Supreme Court Order for Civil Rules 83 and 24
Supreme Court Order for Criminal Rule 12
Supreme Court Order for Appellate Rule 25A
Supreme Court Order for Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 5.4
URAP021. Filing and service. Amend. Amended Rule 21 clarifies the “prisoner mailbox rule,” which will promote consistency, clarity, and certainty in inmate litigation. A virtually identical amendment has also been added to the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.
URAP025. Brief of an amicus curiae or guardian ad litem. Amend. This is a conforming amendment to amended URAP 25A.
URAP025A. Challenging the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance. Amend. This amendment gives the Attorney General the right to appear at oral argument whenever an amicus brief has been filed pursuant to the rule.
URAP030. Decision of the court: dismissal; notice of decision. Amend. The amendment, which deletes the word “dismissal” in the title, corrects an anomaly because nowhere in the rule does it mention the word or provide for dismissing an appeal.
URAP037. Suggestion of mootness; voluntary dismissal. Amend. The proposed amendment makes several changes to the rule.
- Subdivision (a). The changes are intended to clarify and simplify a party’s obligation to bring to the court’s attention those circumstances that render moot one or more issues presented for review on appeal.
- Subdivision (b). The amended subdivision provides that if all parties to an appeal agree that the appeal should be dismissed, and if they stipulate to a motion for voluntary dismissal, then the appeal must be promptly dismissed. The committee felt that the proposed change would encourage prompt and efficient settlements. It also felt that dismissal of the appeal is constitutionally appropriate when the parties have agreed to a voluntary dismissal because there is no longer a justiciable case or controversy. Finally, the committee considered deleting the last sentence on fees and costs, but instead it opted to simply rework the sentence to read: “The stipulation must specify the terms of payment of costs and fees, if any.”
- Subdivision (c). The proposed amendment provides an efficient way for an attorney who is unable to contact his or her client to obtain the necessary affidavit to support a motion for voluntary dismissal, while still protecting the appellant’s right to appeal. The proposal also requires the attorney to certify that he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the appellant no longer wishes to pursue the appeal. The committee concluded that a certification from the attorney is appropriate because it safeguards the appellant’s right to an appeal, and it also avoids having the attorney reveal confidential communications with the client in an affidavit.
- Subdivision (d). The current subdivision —“[a] suggestion of mootness or motion for voluntary dismissal shall be subject to the appellate court’s approval”— has been deleted for the same reasons mentioned in subdivision (b).
URAP055. Petition on appeal.
Amend. Amended Rule 55 gives the court discretion to dismiss an untimely filed petition in a child welfare case, rather than requiring dismissal.
Supreme Court Order
URAP002 Adds Rule 14(a) to the list of rules that the court cannot suspend.
URAP014 Amend. Requires a party seeking review in the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals of an administrative agency order to file a petition for review even if a statute describing the review describes it as an appeal. Removes provisions governed by statute or other rules.
URAP025A New. Describes the requirement and procedures for serving briefs on the attorney general or county or municipal attorney when challenging the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance. Establishes penalties for failure to do so. Allows the attorney general or county or municipal attorney to file an amicus brief when the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance is challenged. Allows the appellate court to request an amicus brief.
URAP052 Describes the effect of post-trial motions in child welfare proceedings using language similar to Rule 4.
Supreme Court Order