49 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2024 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hoffgreen2 sentences2015See Stilling, 770 P.2d at 143 (refusing to apply Griffith v. Kentucky when the new rule of criminal procedure was, decided "on neither federal nor state consUtutlonal principles, but rather as a result of our supervisory capacity over the lower courts"). . 73 . 814 P.2d 1119, 1123 (Utah 1991) (refusing to apply a rule retroactively when "[the strict compliance rule announced in Gibbons was ... a clear break, with this Court's rulings in previous cases dealing with the validity of guilty pleas"). 74 . 913 P.2d 350, 354 (Utah 1996) (holding that "our decision in Brown announced for the first . t 2013In other words, to permit withdrawal of a guilty plea under the substantial compliance standard, there must have been "a significant departure from Rule 11 requirements which [leads] to considerable doubt as to whether a defendant's plea was knowing and voluntary." Hoff, 814 P.2d at 1125 . | 3 | 6 |
State v. Maguiregreen2 sentences2013See State v. Maguire, 830 P.2d 216 , 217 n. 1 (Utah 1992) (per curiam) (observing that "it is possible that the definition of the 'record as a whole under the substantial compliance test might be broader (including information in the case known to the defendant but not to the judge taking the plea-e.g., evidence at preliminary hearing, confessions, etc.) than it is under the strict compliance test"). 1999Id. ¶ 15 Furthermore, there is no exception in Utah case law to the strict compliance requirement when the plea is taken after commencement of trial. | 2 | 4 |
State v. Lovellgreen2 sentences2015See Stilling, 770 P.2d at 143 (refusing to apply Griffith v. Kentucky when the new rule of criminal procedure was, decided "on neither federal nor state consUtutlonal principles, but rather as a result of our supervisory capacity over the lower courts"). . 73 . 814 P.2d 1119, 1123 (Utah 1991) (refusing to apply a rule retroactively when "[the strict compliance rule announced in Gibbons was ... a clear break, with this Court's rulings in previous cases dealing with the validity of guilty pleas"). 74 . 913 P.2d 350, 354 (Utah 1996) (holding that "our decision in Brown announced for the first . t 2015See Stilling, 770 P.2d at 143 (refusing to apply Griffith v. Kentucky when the new rule of criminal procedure was, decided "on neither federal nor state consUtutlonal principles, but rather as a result of our supervisory capacity over the lower courts"). . 73 . 814 P.2d 1119, 1123 (Utah 1991) (refusing to apply a rule retroactively when "[the strict compliance rule announced in Gibbons was ... a clear break, with this Court's rulings in previous cases dealing with the validity of guilty pleas"). 74 . 913 P.2d 350, 354 (Utah 1996) (holding that "our decision in Brown announced for the first . t | 2 | 3 |
Wells v. Children's Aid Soc. of Utahgreen2 sentences2015Id. at 208 . 2012Rather, an unwed father has a "provisional right" to parenthood, Wells v. Children's Aid Soc'y of Utah, 681 P.2d 199, 206 (Utah 1984), and due process requires only that an unwed father have "a meaningful chance to preserve his opportunity to develop a relationship with his child." T.M. v. B.B. | 2 | 3 |
Jau-Fei Chen v. Stewartgreen2 sentences2013See Chen v. Stewart, 2004 UT 82, ¶ 79 , 100 P.3d 1177 (citing judicial economy considerations in support of the marshaling rule). 1102 Having done just that, I would conclude that the State's briefs are sufficient. 2013See Chen v. Stewart, 2004 UT 82, ¶ 79 , 100 P.3d 1177 (citing judicial economy considerations in support of the marshaling rule). 1102 Having done just that, I would conclude that the State's briefs are sufficient. | 2 | 2 |
Housing Authority of Salt Lake City v. Delgadogreen2 sentences2012Y14 "Substantial compliance is one of the contract law doctrines that has been imported into lease cases." Housing Auth. of Salt Lake City v. Delgado, 914 P.2d 1163, 1165 (Utah Ct.App.1996) (applying the doctrine of substantial compliance to a residential lease); see also Cache Cnty. v. Beus, 1999 UT App 134, ¶¶ 31, 41 , 978 P.2d 1043 (acknowledging the potential application of the substantial compliance doctrine to a "negotiated commercial lease between sophisticated parties"). 2012The substantial compliance doctrine furthers that policy by allowing equity to intervene and rescue a lessee from forfeiture of a lease when the lessee has substantially complied with the lease in good faith." Delgado, 914 P.2d at 1165 (citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Greene v. Utah Transit Authoritygreen2 sentences2006Barring statutory ambiguity, we have consistently declined to relax the requirements of the Immunity Act. 1[ 45 For example, in Greene, we refused to create an exception to the strict compliance rule where a claims adjuster employed by a state entity allegedly misdirected the plaintiff as to where to send the requisite notice. 2001 UT 109 , T 17, 37 P.3d 1156 . 2006Barring statutory ambiguity, we have consistently declined to relax the requirements of the Immunity Act. 1[ 45 For example, in Greene, we refused to create an exception to the strict compliance rule where a claims adjuster employed by a state entity allegedly misdirected the plaintiff as to where to send the requisite notice. 2001 UT 109 , T 17, 37 P.3d 1156 . | 1 | 3 |
Cache County v. Beusgreen2 sentences2012Y14 "Substantial compliance is one of the contract law doctrines that has been imported into lease cases." Housing Auth. of Salt Lake City v. Delgado, 914 P.2d 1163, 1165 (Utah Ct.App.1996) (applying the doctrine of substantial compliance to a residential lease); see also Cache Cnty. v. Beus, 1999 UT App 134, ¶¶ 31, 41 , 978 P.2d 1043 (acknowledging the potential application of the substantial compliance doctrine to a "negotiated commercial lease between sophisticated parties"). 2012Y14 "Substantial compliance is one of the contract law doctrines that has been imported into lease cases." Housing Auth. of Salt Lake City v. Delgado, 914 P.2d 1163, 1165 (Utah Ct.App.1996) (applying the doctrine of substantial compliance to a residential lease); see also Cache Cnty. v. Beus, 1999 UT App 134, ¶¶ 31, 41 , 978 P.2d 1043 (acknowledging the potential application of the substantial compliance doctrine to a "negotiated commercial lease between sophisticated parties"). | 1 | 2 |
U-Beva Mines v. Toledo Mining Companygreen2 sentences2022The doctrine of substantial compliance holds special prominence in lease cases because the law disfavors lease forfeitures.76 Seller has made no argument for why a _____________________________________________________________ 73 471 P.2d 867 (Utah 1970). 74 Id. at 867–68. 75 Id. at 869 . 76 See id. (applying substantial compliance to a lease because of ―a generally accepted policy against forfeiture‖); Hous. 2022The doctrine of substantial compliance holds special prominence in lease cases because the law disfavors lease forfeitures.76 Seller has made no argument for why a _____________________________________________________________ 73 471 P.2d 867 (Utah 1970). 74 Id. at 867–68. 75 Id. at 869 . 76 See id. (applying substantial compliance to a lease because of ―a generally accepted policy against forfeiture‖); Hous. | 1 | 2 |
Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Salt Lake Countygreen2 sentences2011Generally, substantial compliance with a statutory provision is adequate when the provision is directory, meaning it goes " 'merely to the proper, orderly and prompt conduct of the business," id. (quoting Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Salt Lake Cnty., 575 P.2d 705, 706 (Utah 1978)); when the result will nevertheless effectuate the policy behind the statute; and when using a substantial compliance standard will not result in prejudice. 2011See id. | 1 | 2 |
Gurule v. Salt Lake Countygreen2 sentences2004This notwithstanding, the State was well aware of which Utah State Liquor Store was the subject of Plaintiff's claim and thereby in a position to (1) "correct the condition that caused the injury," and (2) "evaluate the claim, and perhaps settle the matter without the expense of litigation." *261 Larson, 955 P.2d at 345-46 . [3] Neither of the cases relied upon by the trial court nor any of the other so-called actual notice cases, address what constitutes a "brief statement of the facts." Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-11 (3)(a)(i); see Gurule v. Salt Lake County, 2003 UT 25, ¶ 5 , 69 P.3d 1287 (concl 2004This notwithstanding, the State was well aware of which Utah State Liquor Store was the subject of Plaintiff's claim and thereby in a position to (1) "correct the condition that caused the injury," and (2) "evaluate the claim, and perhaps settle the matter without the expense of litigation." *261 Larson, 955 P.2d at 345-46 . [3] Neither of the cases relied upon by the trial court nor any of the other so-called actual notice cases, address what constitutes a "brief statement of the facts." Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-11 (3)(a)(i); see Gurule v. Salt Lake County, 2003 UT 25, ¶ 5 , 69 P.3d 1287 (concl | 1 | 2 |
State v. Hickmangreen2 sentences1993The strict compliance rule first articulated by this court in Gibbons constituted "a clear break with the past." State v. Hickman, 779 P.2d 670 , 672 n. 1 (Utah 1989); State v. Maguire, 830 P.2d 216 (Utah 1992); State v. Hoff, 814 P.2d 1119, 1123 (Utah 1991). 1993The strict compliance rule first articulated by this court in Gibbons constituted “a clear break with the past.” State v. Hickman, 779 P.2d 670 , 672 n. 1 (Utah 1989); State v. Maguire, 830 P.2d 216 (Utah 1992); State v. Hoff, 814 P.2d 1119, 1123 (Utah 1991). | 1 | 2 |
Mayer v. Adamsgreen1 sentence2024See State v. Cline, 224 N.W. 6 , 8–9 (Neb. 1929) (holding substantial compliance did not apply where “there was no attempt to follow the governing constitutional or statutory provisions as to publication of notice”); accord Op. of the Justs., 275 A.2d 558, 563 (Del. 1971) (explaining that “substantial compliance may not be predicated upon no compliance”); Mayer v. Adams, 186 S.E. 420, 424 (Ga. 1936) (applying substantial compliance “under circumstances where there was obviously an attempt in good faith to comply with the Constitution”). ¶142 This is not a case in which the Legislature attempte | 1 | 1 |
State ex rel. Hall v. Clinegreen1 sentence2024See State v. Cline, 224 N.W. 6 , 8–9 (Neb. 1929) (holding substantial compliance did not apply where “there was no attempt to follow the governing constitutional or statutory provisions as to publication of notice”); accord Op. of the Justs., 275 A.2d 558, 563 (Del. 1971) (explaining that “substantial compliance may not be predicated upon no compliance”); Mayer v. Adams, 186 S.E. 420, 424 (Ga. 1936) (applying substantial compliance “under circumstances where there was obviously an attempt in good faith to comply with the Constitution”). ¶142 This is not a case in which the Legislature attempte | 1 | 1 |
Opinion of the Justicesgreen1 sentence2024See State v. Cline, 224 N.W. 6 , 8–9 (Neb. 1929) (holding substantial compliance did not apply where “there was no attempt to follow the governing constitutional or statutory provisions as to publication of notice”); accord Op. of the Justs., 275 A.2d 558, 563 (Del. 1971) (explaining that “substantial compliance may not be predicated upon no compliance”); Mayer v. Adams, 186 S.E. 420, 424 (Ga. 1936) (applying substantial compliance “under circumstances where there was obviously an attempt in good faith to comply with the Constitution”). ¶142 This is not a case in which the Legislature attempte | 1 | 1 |
Mind & Motion Utah Investments, LLC v. Celtic Bank Corp.green2 sentences2023See Mind & Motion Utah Invs., LLC v. Celtic Bank Corp., 2016 UT 6, ¶ 24 , 367 P.3d 994 . 2023See Mind & Motion Utah Invs., LLC v. Celtic Bank Corp., 2016 UT 6, ¶ 24 , 367 P.3d 994 . | 1 | 1 |
Zion Village Resort v. Pro Curb USAgreen1 sentence2020See Utah Code Ann. § 38 -1a-501(2)(a) (continued…) 20190736-CA and 20190831-CA 13 2020 UT App 167 Zion Village v. Pro Curb U.S.A. ¶28 Zion Village resists this conclusion by pointing to the practical functioning and purpose of the Registry, which serves as a central database, allowing interested persons to search for preliminary notices and other documents by property owner, contractor, address, and parcel number. | 1 | 1 |
Gray v. Netherlandgreen1 sentence2020As we have previously explained, “[m]ere notice is an empty gesture if it is not accompanied by a meaningful chance to make your case.”25 For this reason, “the Due Process Clause also guarantees . . . an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”26 In this case, the district court relied upon the strict compliance requirement in section 110 of the Adoption Act to deprive Mother of an opportunity to contest the termination of her parental rights to K.T.B., as well as K.T.B.’s subsequent adoption. ¶25 But the promise of an opportunity to be heard may be limited by | 1 | 1 |
Mathews v. Eldridgegreen1 sentence2020As we have previously explained, “[m]ere notice is an empty gesture if it is not accompanied by a meaningful chance to make your case.”25 For this reason, “the Due Process Clause also guarantees . . . an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”26 In this case, the district court relied upon the strict compliance requirement in section 110 of the Adoption Act to deprive Mother of an opportunity to contest the termination of her parental rights to K.T.B., as well as K.T.B.’s subsequent adoption. ¶25 But the promise of an opportunity to be heard may be limited by | 1 | 1 |
In Re Adoption of B.Y.green1 sentence2020And the State certainly accords due process when it terminates a claim for failure to comply with a reasonable procedural . . . rule.”). 28 In re Adoption of B.Y., 2015 UT 67, ¶ 27 (alteration in original) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted). 29 Id. ¶ 28. 30 Id. ¶ 32 (citation omitted). 10 Cite as: 2020 UT 51 Opinion of the Court could have complied with the procedural requirement under the circumstances, compliance is possible, and the plaintiff’s access to the justice system has not been foreclosed. | 1 | 1 |
Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.green1 sentence2020As we have previously explained, “[m]ere notice is an empty gesture if it is not accompanied by a meaningful chance to make your case.”25 For this reason, “the Due Process Clause also guarantees . . . an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.”26 In this case, the district court relied upon the strict compliance requirement in section 110 of the Adoption Act to deprive Mother of an opportunity to contest the termination of her parental rights to K.T.B., as well as K.T.B.’s subsequent adoption. ¶25 But the promise of an opportunity to be heard may be limited by | 1 | 1 |
| Amresco Independence v. Sps Propertiesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Timm v. Dewsnupgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Concepts, Inc. v. First Security Realty Services, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Amresco Independence Funding, Inc. v. SPS Properties, L.L.C.green | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Stillinggreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Gordongreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Bakergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bearden v. Georgiagreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Alexandergreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Hittlegreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Kaygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Wheeler v. McPhersongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Projects Unlimited, Inc. v. Copper State Thrift & Loan Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Tech-Fluid Services, Inc. v. Gavilan Operating, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Cache County v. Property Tax Division of the Utah State Tax Commissiongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Thimmes v. Utah State Universitygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Hollandgreen | 1 | 1 |
| In Re Adoption of SLFgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Benvenutogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Visser
green
2 sentences2006P. 25(c), applying the framework of the strict compliance standard in evaluating compliance with rule 25 is entirely appropriate. ¶ 34 Nevertheless, in imposing this duty of strict compliance on juvenile courts, it must be recognized, as is true in the district court, "that the substantive goal of rule [25] ... *1239 should not be overshadowed or undermined by formalistic ritual." Visser, 2000 UT 88 at ¶ 11 , 22 P.3d 1242 . 2006P. 25(c), applying the framework of the strict compliance standard in evaluating compliance with rule 25 is entirely appropriate. ¶ 34 Nevertheless, in imposing this duty of strict compliance on juvenile courts, it must be recognized, as is true in the district court, "that the substantive goal of rule [25] ... *1239 should not be overshadowed or undermined by formalistic ritual." Visser, 2000 UT 88 at ¶ 11 , 22 P.3d 1242 . | 4 | 2001–2006 |
State v. Corwell
green
2 sentences2012Id. 118 ; see also State v. Alexander, 2012 UT 27, ¶¶23-25 , 279 P.3d 371 (explaining that while the trial court's compliance with rule 11 "forecloses many potential arguments that the defendant's plea was not knowingly and voluntarily made," and while "determining whether the district court complied with rule 11 during the plea hearing may be an appropriate step in evaluating whether the defendant's plea was knowing and voluntary," a trial court's failure to comply with rule 11 does not necessarily render a plea unknowing or involuntary where the defendant fails to "show either that he did no 2006Thus, "[a]lthough the phrase might suggest otherwise, strict compliance with rule [25] does not require that a [juvenile] court follow a `particular script' or any other `specific method of communicating the rights enumerated by rule [25].'" Corwell, 2005 UT 28 at ¶ 12 , 114 P.3d 569 (quoting Visser, 2000 UT 88 at ¶ 13 , 22 P.3d 1242 ). | 3 | 2006–2012 |
Patterson v. Patterson
green
2 sentences2012All of this presented a clear "opportunity to address the claimed error, and if appropriate, correct it." Patterson v. Patterson, 2011 UT 68, ¶ 15 , 266 P.3d 828 (internal quotation marks omitted). 2012All of this presented a clear "opportunity to address the claimed error, and if appropriate, correct it." Patterson v. Patterson, 2011 UT 68, ¶ 15 , 266 P.3d 828 (internal quotation marks omitted). | 2 | 2012–2012 |
United States v. Virginia
green
2 sentences2012If a party were to assert below that a law discriminated against his sex in violation of his constitutional rights and cited United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 , 116 S.Ct. 2264 , 135 L.Ed.2d 735 (1996), we would not fault him for failing to utter the words "equal protection." This would carry the preservation requirement too far. { 39 Here, the district court was presented with arguments about due process and a putative father's constitutional rights in a relationship with his child, case law discussing at length the interplay between the Act's strict compliance standard and constitutiona 2012If a party were to assert below that a law discriminated against his sex in violation of his constitutional rights and cited United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 , 116 S.Ct. 2264 , 135 L.Ed.2d 735 (1996), we would not fault him for failing to utter the words "equal protection." This would carry the preservation requirement too far. { 39 Here, the district court was presented with arguments about due process and a putative father's constitutional rights in a relationship with his child, case law discussing at length the interplay between the Act's strict compliance standard and constitutiona | 2 | 2012–2012 |
Xiao Yang Li v. University of Utah
green
2 sentences2012Our supreme court reviewed the scope of that requirement in Xigo Yang Li v. University of Utah, 2006 UT 57 , 144 P.3d 1142 , where it considered whether a complaint filed by the heirs of persons killed in a traffic accident should have been dismissed. 2012Our supreme court reviewed the scope of that requirement in Xigo Yang Li v. University of Utah, 2006 UT 57 , 144 P.3d 1142 , where it considered whether a complaint filed by the heirs of persons killed in a traffic accident should have been dismissed. | 2 | 2012–2012 |
Mecham v. Frazier
green
2 sentences2012And despite the absence of a claim for those damages, the notice of claim is detailed enough to provide the District an opportunity to "correct the condition that caused the injury, evaluate the claim, and perhaps settle the matter without the expense of litigation." Mecham v. Frazier, 2008 UT 60, ¶ 17 , 198 P.3d 630 (internal quotation marks omitted). 119 The District's argument seems more accurately characterized as a challenge to the Jenkinses' compliance with the requirement that the notice of claim include a description of "the damages incurred by the claimant so far as they are known." S 2012And despite the absence of a claim for those damages, the notice of claim is detailed enough to provide the District an opportunity to “correct the condition that caused the injury, evaluate the claim, and perhaps settle the matter without the expense of litigation.” Mecham v. Frazier, 2008 UT 60, ¶ 17 , 193 P.3d 630 (internal quotation marks omitted). ¶19 The District’s argument seems more accurately characterized as a challenge to the Jenkinses’ compliance with the requirement that the notice of claim include a description of “the damages incurred by the claimant so far as they are known.” S | 2 | 2012–2012 |
In Re Adoption of Doe
green
2 sentences2010In my opinion, such a system serves no beneficial purpose and operates only as an opportunity "to divest unmarried biological fathers of the right to raise their children for substantive `technicalities' that have not yet been adequately defined." In re adoption of Baby Boy Doe, 2008 UT App 449, ¶ 9 , 199 P.3d 368 (Davis, J., concurring). ¶ 44 I agree with the concurrence in In re adoption of Baby Boy Doe that a strict compliance standard is best reserved for procedural matters such as meeting deadlines, filing documents in the appropriate location, and the signing and notarizing of affidavits 2010In my opinion, such a system serves no beneficial purpose and operates only as an opportunity "to divest unmarried biological fathers of the right to raise their children for substantive `technicalities' that have not yet been adequately defined." In re adoption of Baby Boy Doe, 2008 UT App 449, ¶ 9 , 199 P.3d 368 (Davis, J., concurring). ¶ 44 I agree with the concurrence in In re adoption of Baby Boy Doe that a strict compliance standard is best reserved for procedural matters such as meeting deadlines, filing documents in the appropriate location, and the signing and notarizing of affidavits | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Rocky Mountain Hospitality v. Mountain Classic
neutral
1 sentence2022The substantial compliance doctrine furthers that policy by allowing equity to intervene and rescue a lessee from forfeiture of a lease when the (continued . . .) 16 Cite as: 2022 UT 44 Opinion of the Court case applying substantial compliance to a lease agreement applies to a case involving a real estate purchase contract. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
In re K.T.B.
green
1 sentence2020And the State certainly accords due process when it terminates a claim for failure to comply with a reasonable procedural . . . rule.”). 28 In re Adoption of B.Y., 2015 UT 67, ¶ 27 (alteration in original) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted). 29 Id. ¶ 28. 30 Id. ¶ 32 (citation omitted). 10 Cite as: 2020 UT 51 Opinion of the Court could have complied with the procedural requirement under the circumstances, compliance is possible, and the plaintiff’s access to the justice system has not been foreclosed. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| State v. Kabor green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Arriaga v. State neutral | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| State v. Wimberly green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Southwick v. Southwick green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Bonds v. Third District Court green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Larson v. Park City Municipal Corp. green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| Mollerup v. Storage Systems International green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| State v. Thurston green | 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.