8 Utah opinions name it 1 courts 1991–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
NEW ENERGY ECONOMY, INC. v. Martinezgreen2 sentences2013Standing in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine and is used to refuse to determine the merits of a legal controversy irrespective of its correctness where the party advancing it is not properly situated to prosecute the action.” (footnotes omitted)). 10 Cite as: 2013 UT 18 Opinion of the Court est in the matter nor be a public official.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Godfrey v. State, 752 N.W.2d 413, 425 (Iowa 2008) (“We believe our doctrine of standing in Iowa is not so rigid that an excep- tion to the injury requirement could not be recognized for citizens who seek to resolve ce 2013Standing in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine and is used to refuse to determine the merits of a legal controversy irrespective of its correctness where the party advancing it is not properly situated to prosecute the action.” (footnotes omitted)). 10 Cite as: 2013 UT 18 Opinion of the Court est in the matter nor be a public official.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Godfrey v. State, 752 N.W.2d 413, 425 (Iowa 2008) (“We believe our doctrine of standing in Iowa is not so rigid that an excep- tion to the injury requirement could not be recognized for citizens who seek to resolve ce | 3 | 3 |
Godfrey v. Stategreen2 sentences2013Standing in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine and is used to refuse to determine the merits of a legal controversy irrespective of its correctness where the party advancing it is not properly situated to prosecute the action.” (footnotes omitted)). 10 Cite as: 2013 UT 18 Opinion of the Court est in the matter nor be a public official.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Godfrey v. State, 752 N.W.2d 413, 425 (Iowa 2008) (“We believe our doctrine of standing in Iowa is not so rigid that an excep- tion to the injury requirement could not be recognized for citizens who seek to resolve ce 2013Standing in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine and is used to refuse to determine the merits of a legal controversy irrespective of its correctness where the party advancing it is not properly situated to prosecute the action.” (footnotes omitted)). 10 Cite as: 2013 UT 18 Opinion of the Court est in the matter nor be a public official.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Godfrey v. State, 752 N.W.2d 413, 425 (Iowa 2008) (“We believe our doctrine of standing in Iowa is not so rigid that an excep- tion to the injury requirement could not be recognized for citizens who seek to resolve ce | 3 | 3 |
In Re the Estates of Williamsgreen2 sentences2013A judge-made doctrine that conflicts with a statute is certainly "displaced" by it. 2 113 We find the Code to displace the doctrine of equitable adoption recognized in Williams' Estates In that case, a couple took a child into their home, agreeing with the birth mother that they would adopt the child and "raise, care for and treat [her] in all respects as their own child." In re Williams' Estates, 10 Utah 2d 83 , 348 P.2d. 683, 685 (1960). 2013A judge-made doctrine that conflicts with a statute is certainly "displaced" by it. 2 113 We find the Code to displace the doctrine of equitable adoption recognized in Williams' Estates In that case, a couple took a child into their home, agreeing with the birth mother that they would adopt the child and "raise, care for and treat [her] in all respects as their own child." In re Williams' Estates, 10 Utah 2d 83 , 348 P.2d. 683, 685 (1960). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gregory v. Shurtleff
green
2 sentences2021For example, in Gregory v. Shurtleff, we said both ―that ‗the Utah Constitution . . . mandates certain standing requirements, which emanate from the principle of separation of powers,‘‖ 2013 UT 18 , ¶ 12 n.4, 299 P.3d 1098 (quoting Brown, 2010 UT 14, ¶ 12 ), and also that ―[s]tanding in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine.‖ Id. ¶ 16 n.10 (quoting 59 AM. 2021For example, in Gregory v. Shurtleff, we said both ―that ‗the Utah Constitution . . . mandates certain standing requirements, which emanate from the principle of separation of powers,‘‖ 2013 UT 18 , ¶ 12 n.4, 299 P.3d 1098 (quoting Brown, 2010 UT 14, ¶ 12 ), and also that ―[s]tanding in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine.‖ Id. ¶ 16 n.10 (quoting 59 AM. | 4 | 2013–2021 |
Daniels v. Gamma West Brachytherapy, LLC
green
2 sentences2013Brachytherapy, LLC, 2009 UT 66, ¶ 49 , 221 P.3d 256 (―A statute preempts a common law claim by specifi- cally adopting a limitation or prohibition on a claim or by com- prehensively addressing a particular area of law such that it dis- places the common law.‖). 2 The argument that equitable adoption properly ―supple- ment[s]‖ the Code because it operates ―parallel with‖ it infra 4 Cite as: 2013 UT 46 Opinion of the Court ¶13 We find the Code to displace the doctrine of equitable adoption recognized in Williams’ Estates. 2013Brachytherapy, LLC, 2009 UT 66, ¶ 49 , 221 P.3d 256 (―A statute preempts a common law claim by specifi- cally adopting a limitation or prohibition on a claim or by com- prehensively addressing a particular area of law such that it dis- places the common law.‖). 2 The argument that equitable adoption properly ―supple- ment[s]‖ the Code because it operates ―parallel with‖ it infra 4 Cite as: 2013 UT 46 Opinion of the Court ¶13 We find the Code to displace the doctrine of equitable adoption recognized in Williams’ Estates. | 3 | 2013–2013 |
In re Estate of William J. Hannifin
green
2 sentences2013Brachytherapy, LLC, 2009 UT 66, ¶ 49 , 221 P.3d 256 (―A statute preempts a common law claim by specifi- cally adopting a limitation or prohibition on a claim or by com- prehensively addressing a particular area of law such that it dis- places the common law.‖). 2 The argument that equitable adoption properly ―supple- ment[s]‖ the Code because it operates ―parallel with‖ it infra 4 Cite as: 2013 UT 46 Opinion of the Court ¶13 We find the Code to displace the doctrine of equitable adoption recognized in Williams’ Estates. 2013Brachytherapy, LLC, 2009 UT 66, ¶ 49 , 221 P.3d 256 (―A statute preempts a common law claim by specifi- cally adopting a limitation or prohibition on a claim or by com- prehensively addressing a particular area of law such that it dis- places the common law.‖). 2 The argument that equitable adoption properly ―supple- ment[s]‖ the Code because it operates ―parallel with‖ it infra ¶¶ 4 Cite as: 2013 UT 46 Opinion of the Court ¶13 We find the Code to displace the doctrine of equitable adoption recognized in Williams’ Estates. | 3 | 2013–2013 |
Brown v. Division of Water Rights of the Department of Natural Resources
green
2 sentences2021For example, in Gregory v. Shurtleff, we said both ―that ‗the Utah Constitution . . . mandates certain standing requirements, which emanate from the principle of separation of powers,‘‖ 2013 UT 18 , ¶ 12 n.4, 299 P.3d 1098 (quoting Brown, 2010 UT 14, ¶ 12 ), and also that ―[s]tanding in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine.‖ Id. ¶ 16 n.10 (quoting 59 AM. 2021For example, in Gregory v. Shurtleff, we said both ―that ‗the Utah Constitution . . . mandates certain standing requirements, which emanate from the principle of separation of powers,‘‖ 2013 UT 18 , ¶ 12 n.4, 299 P.3d 1098 (quoting Brown, 2010 UT 14, ¶ 12 ), and also that ―[s]tanding in the state courts is a judge-made doctrine.‖ Id. ¶ 16 n.10 (quoting 59 AM. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Copeland
green
1 sentence1991Nevertheless, we held that the record was sufficient to support the conclusion that Jolivet “understood the elements of the crimes charged and how those elements related to the facts.” In State v. Copeland, 765 P.2d 1266 (Utah 1988), we also addressed that issue. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Jolivet v. Cook
green
1 sentence1991In Jolivet v. Cook, 784 P.2d 1148 (Utah 1989), the trial judge made no inquiry into the elements of the offense charged and their relationship to the facts. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
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.