13 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Utah courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Timothy v. Pia, Anderson, Dorius, Reynard & Moss LLCgreen2 sentences2024See generally Timothy v. Pia, Anderson, Dorius, Reynard & Moss LLC, 2018 UT App 31, ¶ 35 , 424 P.3d 937 (declining to decide whether a claim for civil conspiracy requires “an underlying ‘tort’” or whether “a violation of the [Uniform Fraudulent Transfer] Act could serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim”), vacated on other grounds, 2019 UT 69 , 456 P.3d 731 . 20221046-CA 23 2024 UT App 154 Duffin v. Duffin creditor of the other when there have been “recent threats of divorce”), cert. denied, 4 P.3d 1289 (Utah 2000), and Brandy may then recover the value o 2024See generally Timothy v. Pia, Anderson, Dorius, Reynard & Moss LLC, 2018 UT App 31, ¶ 35 , 424 P.3d 937 (declining to decide whether a claim for civil conspiracy requires “an underlying ‘tort’” or whether “a violation of the [Uniform Fraudulent Transfer] Act could serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim”), vacated on other grounds, 2019 UT 69 , 456 P.3d 731 . 20221046-CA 23 2024 UT App 154 Duffin v. Duffin creditor of the other when there have been “recent threats of divorce”), cert. denied, 4 P.3d 1289 (Utah 2000), and Brandy may then recover the value o | 3 | 3 |
Duffin v. Duffingreen2 sentences2024See generally Timothy v. Pia, Anderson, Dorius, Reynard & Moss LLC, 2018 UT App 31, ¶ 35 , 424 P.3d 937 (declining to decide whether a claim for civil conspiracy requires “an underlying ‘tort’” or whether “a violation of the [Uniform Fraudulent Transfer] Act could serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim”), vacated on other grounds, 2019 UT 69 , 456 P.3d 731 . 20221046-CA 23 2024 UT App 154 Duffin v. Duffin creditor of the other when there have been “recent threats of divorce”), cert. denied, 4 P.3d 1289 (Utah 2000), and Brandy may then recover the value o 2024See generally Timothy v. Pia, Anderson, Dorius, Reynard & Moss LLC, 2018 UT App 31, ¶ 35 , 424 P.3d 937 (declining to decide whether a claim for civil conspiracy requires “an underlying ‘tort’” or whether “a violation of the [Uniform Fraudulent Transfer] Act could serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim”), vacated on other grounds, 2019 UT 69 , 456 P.3d 731 . 20221046-CA 23 2024 UT App 154 Duffin v. Duffin creditor of the other when there have been “recent threats of divorce”), cert. denied, 4 P.3d 1289 (Utah 2000), and Brandy may then recover the value o | 3 | 3 |
National Loan Investors, L.P. v. Givensgreen1 sentence2018In the civil conspiracy section of their complaint, Creditors alleged that Debtors and Appellees "conspired with each other to carry out the means to effectuate a fraudulent transfer" and that "[t]he transfer of the $50,000 to [Law Firm] was in violation of the [Act]." Even assuming, without deciding, that there is no requirement for an underlying "tort" to establish a claim for civil conspiracy and that a violation of the Act could serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim, Creditors have not established that a violation of the Act occurred in this case. 1 | 1 | 1 |
Prows v. Pinpoint Retail Systems, Inc.green1 sentence2014See Prows, 868 P.2d at 812 n. 5 ("A party might also show that ... the choice-of-forum provision was 'obtained by fraud, duress, the abuse of economic power, or other unconscionable means.'" (quoting ResTatemENt (Seconp) or Conrrict or Laws § 80, cmt. c (Supp.1988))); Pohl, Inc. of America v. Webel-huth, 2008 UT 89, 129 , 201 P.3d 944 (noting that a civil conspiracy claim is a "separate and distinct cause[] of action" but that it may be premised on tortious conduct). | 1 | 1 |
Bailey v. Baylesgreen2 sentences2012See generally Bailey v. Bayles, 2002 UT 58, ¶ 10 , 52 P.3d 1158 (“It is well settled that an appellate court may affirm the judgment appealed from if it is sustainable on any legal ground or theory apparent on the record, even though such ground or theory differs from that stated by the trial court to be the basis of its ruling or action . . . .” (internal quotation marks omitted)). 2012See generally Bailey v. Bayles, 2002 UT 58, ¶ 10 , 52 P.3d 1158 (“It is well settled that an appellate court may affirm the judgment appealed from if it is sustainable on any legal ground or theory apparent on the record, even though such ground or theory differs from that stated by the trial court to be the basis of its ruling or action . . . .” (internal quotation marks omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
Puttuck v. Gendrongreen1 sentence2012Here, Plaintiffs alleged only that “the defendants have requested and obtained through fraud upon the Court writs of execution and/or writs of garnishment against the Plaintiff(s) which included unjustified and deliberately inflated ‘costs’ or ‘judgment’ amounts, and the like.” We thus agree with the trial court that, insofar as the Plaintiffs’ civil conspiracy claim rests on the underlying tort of fraud, it fails to adequately allege the elements of civil conspiracy and was properly dismissed on that ground. 20100418‐CA 7 the conspiracy itself.’” Puttuck, 2008 UT App 362, ¶ 21 (quoting 16 Am. | 1 | 1 |
Doit, Inc. v. Touche, Ross & Co.green1 sentence2005See, e.g., DOIT, Inc. v. Touche, Ross & Co., 926 P.2d 835 (Utah 1996) (analyzing the use of a civil conspiracy claim to establish higher damages than previously claimed); Alta Indus. | 1 | 1 |
Israel Pagan Estate v. Cannongreen1 sentence2005Ltd. v. Hurst, 846 P.2d 1282 , 1290 n. 17 (Utah 1993) (stating that civil conspiracy claims can be established using the five factors established in Israel Pagan Estate v. Cannon, 746 P.2d 785, 790 (Utah Ct.App.1987)). | 1 | 1 |
Gildea v. Guardian Title Co. of Utahgreen1 sentence2003See Gildea v. Guardian Title Co., 970 P.2d 1265, 1271 (Utah 1998) (civil conspiracy to defraud); Alta Indus. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bradford v. Bradford
green
2 sentences2024Accordingly, if on remand the factfinder determines that James had an interest in the Property and finds James or Marlo liable based on a UVTA violation, the divorce court—not the factfinder in this case—must determine the amount of Brandy’s claim as James’s creditor in the divorce action, see generally Bradford v. Bradford, 1999 UT App 373, ¶ 16 , 993 P.2d 887 (holding that under the predecessor statute to the UVTA, one spouse becomes a statutory violation can serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim. 2024Accordingly, if on remand the factfinder determines that James had an interest in the Property and finds James or Marlo liable based on a UVTA violation, the divorce court—not the factfinder in this case—must determine the amount of Brandy’s claim as James’s creditor in the divorce action, see generally Bradford v. Bradford, 1999 UT App 373, ¶ 16 , 993 P.2d 887 (holding that under the predecessor statute to the UVTA, one spouse becomes a statutory violation can serve as the unlawful, overt act necessary to support a civil conspiracy claim. | 3 | 2024–2024 |
Pohl, Inc. of America v. Webelhuth
green
2 sentences2020Water Conservancy Dist. v. Keystone Conversions, LLC, 2004 UT 84, ¶ 32 , 103 P.3d 686 (―In a declaratory action . . . , a party seeking a declaration of rights must show the existence of ‗(1) a justiciable controversy, (2) parties whose interests are adverse, (3) a legally protectible interest residing with the party seeking relief, and (4) issues ripe for determination.‘‖ (citation omitted)). ¶43 Fourth, the Third District Court held that the civil conspiracy claim accrued ―by 2009.‖ In so doing, it noted that the ―decision to retain the property was evidently made shortly after the conclusio 2020Water Conservancy Dist. v. Keystone Conversions, LLC, 2004 UT 84, ¶ 32 , 103 P.3d 686 (―In a declaratory action . . . , a party seeking a declaration of rights must show the existence of ‗(1) a justiciable controversy, (2) parties whose interests are adverse, (3) a legally protectible interest residing with the party seeking relief, and (4) issues ripe for determination.‘‖ (citation omitted)). ¶43 Fourth, the Third District Court held that the civil conspiracy claim accrued ―by 2009.‖ In so doing, it noted that the ―decision to retain the property was evidently made shortly after the conclusio | 2 | 2014–2020 |
Bahr v. Imus
green
2 sentences2026“We review summary judgments for correctness, giving no deference to the [district] court’s decision . . . .” Bahr v. Imus, 2011 UT 19, ¶ 16 , 250 P.3d 56 . ¶10 Next, Matt challenges the award of attorney fees by the district court. 2026“We review summary judgments for correctness, giving no deference to the [district] court’s decision . . . .” Bahr v. Imus, 2011 UT 19, ¶ 16 , 250 P.3d 56 . ¶10 Next, Matt challenges the award of attorney fees by the district court. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Musselman v. Keele
green
2 sentences2026Tortious Interference ¶16 “To recover damages for tortious interference a plaintiff must prove (1) that the defendant intentionally interfered with the plaintiff’s existing or potential economic relations, (2) for an improper purpose or by improper means, (3) causing injury to the plaintiff.” Musselman v. Keele, 2024 UT App 143, ¶ 21 , 559 P.3d 64 (cleaned up). 2026Tortious Interference ¶16 “To recover damages for tortious interference a plaintiff must prove (1) that the defendant intentionally interfered with the plaintiff’s existing or potential economic relations, (2) for an improper purpose or by improper means, (3) causing injury to the plaintiff.” Musselman v. Keele, 2024 UT App 143, ¶ 21 , 559 P.3d 64 (cleaned up). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Old Republic National Title v. Cap Fund 783
neutral
1 sentence2026The court further noted that “Old Republic owed no fiduciary duty to [Matt], and without this underlying tort, the civil conspiracy claim would fail as a matter of law.” 20250117-CA 5 2026 UT App 37 Old Republic v. Cap Fund 783 have an honest belief in either the propriety of his civil conspiracy claim or tortious interference claim.” ISSUES AND STANDARDS OF REVIEW ¶9 Matt raises several arguments challenging the district court’s grant of summary judgment. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Board of Trustees v. Keystone Conversions, LLC
green
2 sentences2020Water Conservancy Dist. v. Keystone Conversions, LLC, 2004 UT 84, ¶ 32 , 103 P.3d 686 (―In a declaratory action . . . , a party seeking a declaration of rights must show the existence of ‗(1) a justiciable controversy, (2) parties whose interests are adverse, (3) a legally protectible interest residing with the party seeking relief, and (4) issues ripe for determination.‘‖ (citation omitted)). ¶43 Fourth, the Third District Court held that the civil conspiracy claim accrued ―by 2009.‖ In so doing, it noted that the ―decision to retain the property was evidently made shortly after the conclusio 2020Water Conservancy Dist. v. Keystone Conversions, LLC, 2004 UT 84, ¶ 32 , 103 P.3d 686 (―In a declaratory action . . . , a party seeking a declaration of rights must show the existence of ‗(1) a justiciable controversy, (2) parties whose interests are adverse, (3) a legally protectible interest residing with the party seeking relief, and (4) issues ripe for determination.‘‖ (citation omitted)). ¶43 Fourth, the Third District Court held that the civil conspiracy claim accrued ―by 2009.‖ In so doing, it noted that the ―decision to retain the property was evidently made shortly after the conclusio | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Jedrziewski v. Smith
green
2 sentences2009In fact, joint and several liability for civil conspiracy was what the defendants in Jedrziewski were trying to avoid when they advanced their argument that “the LRA preempted the common law doctrine of civil conspiracy.” Jedrziewski, 2005 UT 85, ¶ 10 , 128 P.3d 1146 . 2009In fact, joint and several liability for civil conspiracy was what the defendants in Jedrziewski were trying to avoid when they advanced their argument that “the LRA preempted the common law doctrine of civil conspiracy.” Jedrziewski, 2005 UT 85, ¶ 10 , 128 P.3d 1146 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Dansie v. HI COUNTRY ESTATES HOMEOWNERS
green
2 sentences2005"It is axiomatic that we will presume the correctness of lower court rulings that neither party challenges on appeal.” Dansie v. Hi-Country Estates Homeowners Ass’n, 2004 UT App 149 ,- *1261 ¶ 10, 92 P.3d 162 . 2005"It is axiomatic that we will presume the correctness of lower court rulings that neither party challenges on appeal.” Dansie v. Hi-Country Estates Homeowners Ass’n, 2004 UT App 149 ,- *1261 ¶ 10, 92 P.3d 162 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Alta Industries, Ltd. v. Hurst
green
1 sentence2005Ltd. v. Hurst, 846 P.2d 1282 , 1290 n. 17 (Utah 1993) (stating that civil conspiracy claims can be established using the five factors established in Israel Pagan Estate v. Cannon, 746 P.2d 785, 790 (Utah Ct.App.1987)). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.