10 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2019 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Rucker v. Daltongreen2 sentences2019See Rucker v. Dalton, 598 P.2d 1336, 1338 (Utah 1979) (“[I]t is not the function of an appellate court to make findings of fact because it does not have the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses testify.”). 2011We therefore accord reasonable discretion to the trial court to determine when sanctions are useful and appropriate."); cf. Rucker v. Dalton, 598 P.2d 1336, 1338 (Utah 1979) ("[It is not the function of an appellate court to make findings of fact because it does not have the advantage of seeing or hearing the witnesses testify."). | 4 | 5 |
Gillmor v. Gillmorgreen2 sentences1994Gillmor v. Gillmor, 745 P.2d 461, 462 (Utah App.1987), cert. denied, 765 P.2d 1278 (Utah 1988). 1993Gillmor v. Gillmor, 745 P.2d 461, 462 (Utah App.1987), cert. denied, 765 P.2d 1278 *543 (Utah 1988). | 2 | 2 |
Dunn v. Dunngreen2 sentences2008See Centro de la Familia de Utah v. Carter, 2004 UT 43, ¶ 6 , 94 P.3d 261 . "[On appeal from a judgment of the trial court, our role is not to substitute our own findings for those of the trial court, but to examine the record for evidence supporting the judgment." Shioji v. Shioji, 712 P.2d 197, 201 (Utah 1985). 2 ANALYSIS {15 In a divorce proceeding, a property distribution "must be based upon adequate factual findings and must be in accordance with the standards set by this state's appellate courts." Dunn v. Dunn, 802 P.2d 1314, 1317 (Utah Ct.App.1990). 2008See Centro de la Familia de Utah v. Carter, 2004 UT 43, ¶ 6 , 94 P.3d 261 . "[O]n appeal from a judgment of the trial court, our role is not to substitute our own findings for those of the trial court, but to examine the record for evidence supporting the judgment." Shioji v. Shioji, 712 P.2d 197, 201 (Utah 1985). [2] ANALYSIS ¶ 15 In a divorce proceeding, a property distribution "must be based upon adequate factual findings and must be in accordance with the standards set by this state's appellate courts." Dunn v. Dunn, 802 P.2d 1314, 1317 (Utah Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Centro De La Familia De Utah v. Cartergreen2 sentences2008See Centro de la Familia de Utah v. Carter, 2004 UT 43, ¶ 6 , 94 P.3d 261 . "[O]n appeal from a judgment of the trial court, our role is not to substitute our own findings for those of the trial court, but to examine the record for evidence supporting the judgment." Shioji v. Shioji, 712 P.2d 197, 201 (Utah 1985). [2] ANALYSIS ¶ 15 In a divorce proceeding, a property distribution "must be based upon adequate factual findings and must be in accordance with the standards set by this state's appellate courts." Dunn v. Dunn, 802 P.2d 1314, 1317 (Utah Ct.App.1990). 2008See Centro de la Familia de Utah v. Carter, 2004 UT 43, ¶ 6 , 94 P.3d 261 . "[O]n appeal from a judgment of the trial court, our role is not to substitute our own findings for those of the trial court, but to examine the record for evidence supporting the judgment." Shioji v. Shioji, 712 P.2d 197, 201 (Utah 1985). [2] ANALYSIS ¶ 15 In a divorce proceeding, a property distribution "must be based upon adequate factual findings and must be in accordance with the standards set by this state's appellate courts." Dunn v. Dunn, 802 P.2d 1314, 1317 (Utah Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Shioji v. Shiojigreen2 sentences2008See Centro de la Familia de Utah v. Carter, 2004 UT 43, ¶ 6 , 94 P.3d 261 . "[On appeal from a judgment of the trial court, our role is not to substitute our own findings for those of the trial court, but to examine the record for evidence supporting the judgment." Shioji v. Shioji, 712 P.2d 197, 201 (Utah 1985). 2 ANALYSIS {15 In a divorce proceeding, a property distribution "must be based upon adequate factual findings and must be in accordance with the standards set by this state's appellate courts." Dunn v. Dunn, 802 P.2d 1314, 1317 (Utah Ct.App.1990). 2008See Centro de la Familia de Utah v. Carter, 2004 UT 43, ¶ 6 , 94 P.3d 261 . "[O]n appeal from a judgment of the trial court, our role is not to substitute our own findings for those of the trial court, but to examine the record for evidence supporting the judgment." Shioji v. Shioji, 712 P.2d 197, 201 (Utah 1985). [2] ANALYSIS ¶ 15 In a divorce proceeding, a property distribution "must be based upon adequate factual findings and must be in accordance with the standards set by this state's appellate courts." Dunn v. Dunn, 802 P.2d 1314, 1317 (Utah Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mendelson v. Roland
green
2 sentences1992The court went on to state that “it is not the function of an appellate court to make findings of fact because it does not have the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses testify.” Id. at 1338 (citing Mendelson v. Roland, 66 Utah 487 , 243 P. 798 (1926)). 1992The court went on to state that "it is not the function of an appellate court to make findings of fact because it does not have the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses testify." Id. at 1338 (citing Mendelson v. Roland, 66 Utah 487 , 243 P. *836 798 (1926)). | 2 | 1979–1992 |
Plaia v. Plaia
neutral
1 sentence2019Here, Alina has not demonstrated that these findings “are so lacking in support as to be against the clear weight of the evidence.” Id. 20170948-CA 12 2019 UT App 130 Plaia v. Plaia ¶20 In light of these findings, Alina has not shown how the court’s ultimate division of property constituted an abuse of discretion resulting in “manifest injustice or inequity.” See Colman, 743 P.2d at 789 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Colman v. Colman
green
1 sentence2019Here, Alina has not demonstrated that these findings “are so lacking in support as to be against the clear weight of the evidence.” Id. 20170948-CA 12 2019 UT App 130 Plaia v. Plaia ¶20 In light of these findings, Alina has not shown how the court’s ultimate division of property constituted an abuse of discretion resulting in “manifest injustice or inequity.” See Colman, 743 P.2d at 789 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Baker v. Baker
green
2 sentences2019The court also found that the couple had “worked together for years with the ultimate goal of a big payoff from the investment of time and energy into the Luxoft endeavor.” “Because we lack the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses testify,” the district court’s “findings of fact are presumed to be correct.” See Baker v. Baker, 866 P.2d 540 , 542–43 (Utah Ct. App. 1993) (quotation simplified). 2019Here, Alina has not demonstrated that these findings “are so lacking in support as to be against the clear weight of the evidence.” Id. 20170948-CA 12 2019 UT App 130 Plaia v. Plaia ¶20 In light of these findings, Alina has not shown how the court’s ultimate division of property constituted an abuse of discretion resulting in “manifest injustice or inequity.” See Colman, 743 P.2d at 789 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Colorado Flying Academy, Inc., a Colorado Corporation, Federal Insurance Company, and Associated Aviation Underwriters v. The United States of America
green
1 sentence2011In this respect, we agree with the statement of the court in Colorado Flying Academy, Inc. v. United States, 724 F.2d 871 (10th Cir.1984), albeit made in a different context: "It may be that adequate evidence as to these matters is in the present record. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Watson v. Watson
green
2 sentences2008Therefore, "Iwle will alter the trial court's property division 'only if there was a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law resulting in a substantial and prejudicial error, the evidence clearly preponderated against the findings, or such a serious inequity has resulted as to manifest a clear abuse of discretion."" Id. at 543 (quoting Watson, 837 P.2d at 5 ); see also id. at 542 ("The trial court's findings of fact are presumed to be correct, and because we lack the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses testify, we do not make our own findings of fact."). § 14 A trial court's findin 2008Therefore, "[w]e will alter the trial court's property division `only if there was a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law resulting in a substantial and prejudicial error, the evidence clearly preponderated against the findings, or such a serious inequity has resulted as to manifest a clear abuse of discretion.'" Id. at 543 (quoting Watson, 837 P.2d at 5 ); see also id. at 542 ("The trial court's findings of fact are presumed to be correct, and because we lack the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses testify, we do not make our own findings of fact."). ¶ 14 A trial court's findin | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lyon v. Burton
green
2 sentences2008Therefore, "Iwle will alter the trial court's property division 'only if there was a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law resulting in a substantial and prejudicial error, the evidence clearly preponderated against the findings, or such a serious inequity has resulted as to manifest a clear abuse of discretion."" Id. at 543 (quoting Watson, 837 P.2d at 5 ); see also id. at 542 ("The trial court's findings of fact are presumed to be correct, and because we lack the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses testify, we do not make our own findings of fact."). § 14 A trial court's findin 2008Therefore, "[w]e will alter the trial court's property division `only if there was a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law resulting in a substantial and prejudicial error, the evidence clearly preponderated against the findings, or such a serious inequity has resulted as to manifest a clear abuse of discretion.'" Id. at 543 (quoting Watson, 837 P.2d at 5 ); see also id. at 542 ("The trial court's findings of fact are presumed to be correct, and because we lack the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses testify, we do not make our own findings of fact."). ¶ 14 A trial court's findin | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Lovegren
green
1 sentence2000"This court has consistently recognized that [issues of search and seizure] are highly fact sensitive," State v. Lovegren, 798 P.2d 767 , TIO (Utah Ct.App.1990), and "[it is not the function of an appellate court to make findings of fact because it does not have the advantage of seeing or hearing the witnesses testify." Rucker v. Dalton, 598 P.2d 1336, 1338 (Utah 1979). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.