Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 2015–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re J.M...green2 sentences2026A best-interest analysis “is a wide-ranging inquiry that asks a court to weigh the entirety of the circumstances, including a parent’s past behavior, to determine what is in the best interest of the child under all of the circumstances,” In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 , and “[w]e review deferentially a lower court’s best- interest determination,” In re J.J.W., 2022 UT App 116, ¶ 18 , 520 P.3d 38 . 2025A best-interest analysis “is a wide-ranging inquiry that asks a court to weigh the entirety of the circumstances, including a parent’s past behavior, to determine what is in the best interest of the child under all of the circumstances,” In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 , and “[w]e review deferentially a lower court’s best- interest determination,” In re J.J.W., 2022 UT App 116, ¶ 18 , 520 P.3d 38 . | 1 | 4 |
In re G.D...green1 sentence2024Outside of the factors enumerated by the relevant statutes, 64 the best interest __________________________________________________________ 59 See UTAH CODE § 80-4-104(12)(a) (formerly id. § 78A-6-503(12) (2020)); In re J.P., 648 P.2d 1364, 1368 (Utah 1982) (“The best interest of the child has always been a paramount or ‘polar star’ principle in cases involving termination of parental rights . . . .”). 60 In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 . 61 In re Z.C.W., 2021 UT App 98, ¶ 12 , 500 P.3d 94 . 62 In re C.L., 2007 UT 51 , ¶ 22, 166 P.3d 608 (“[A] juvenile court judge conducting a b | 1 | 1 |
In Re JPgreen1 sentence2024Outside of the factors enumerated by the relevant statutes, 64 the best interest __________________________________________________________ 59 See UTAH CODE § 80-4-104(12)(a) (formerly id. § 78A-6-503(12) (2020)); In re J.P., 648 P.2d 1364, 1368 (Utah 1982) (“The best interest of the child has always been a paramount or ‘polar star’ principle in cases involving termination of parental rights . . . .”). 60 In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 . 61 In re Z.C.W., 2021 UT App 98, ¶ 12 , 500 P.3d 94 . 62 In re C.L., 2007 UT 51 , ¶ 22, 166 P.3d 608 (“[A] juvenile court judge conducting a b | 1 | 1 |
In re B.T.B.green1 sentence2020See In re B.T.B., 2018 UT App 157 , ¶ 47– 50. ¶36 Mother has not demonstrated that rule 404(b) operates to keep a juvenile court from considering a parent’s past acts in connection with a fitness or a best-interest inquiry. | 1 | 1 |
Thurston v. Box Elder Countygreen1 sentence2015"The application of the mandate rule lacks the flexibility found in other branches of the law of the case doe-trine." Thurston v. Box Elder County, 892 P.2d 1034, 1038 (Utah 1995). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re J.J.W.
green
2 sentences2026A best-interest analysis “is a wide-ranging inquiry that asks a court to weigh the entirety of the circumstances, including a parent’s past behavior, to determine what is in the best interest of the child under all of the circumstances,” In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 , and “[w]e review deferentially a lower court’s best- interest determination,” In re J.J.W., 2022 UT App 116, ¶ 18 , 520 P.3d 38 . 2025A best-interest analysis “is a wide-ranging inquiry that asks a court to weigh the entirety of the circumstances, including a parent’s past behavior, to determine what is in the best interest of the child under all of the circumstances,” In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 , and “[w]e review deferentially a lower court’s best- interest determination,” In re J.J.W., 2022 UT App 116, ¶ 18 , 520 P.3d 38 . | 2 | 2025–2026 |
In re Z.C.W...
green
1 sentence2024Outside of the factors enumerated by the relevant statutes, 64 the best interest __________________________________________________________ 59 See UTAH CODE § 80-4-104(12)(a) (formerly id. § 78A-6-503(12) (2020)); In re J.P., 648 P.2d 1364, 1368 (Utah 1982) (“The best interest of the child has always been a paramount or ‘polar star’ principle in cases involving termination of parental rights . . . .”). 60 In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 . 61 In re Z.C.W., 2021 UT App 98, ¶ 12 , 500 P.3d 94 . 62 In re C.L., 2007 UT 51 , ¶ 22, 166 P.3d 608 (“[A] juvenile court judge conducting a b | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State Ex Rel. Cl
green
2 sentences2024Outside of the factors enumerated by the relevant statutes, 64 the best interest __________________________________________________________ 59 See UTAH CODE § 80-4-104(12)(a) (formerly id. § 78A-6-503(12) (2020)); In re J.P., 648 P.2d 1364, 1368 (Utah 1982) (“The best interest of the child has always been a paramount or ‘polar star’ principle in cases involving termination of parental rights . . . .”). 60 In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 . 61 In re Z.C.W., 2021 UT App 98, ¶ 12 , 500 P.3d 94 . 62 In re C.L., 2007 UT 51 , ¶ 22, 166 P.3d 608 (“[A] juvenile court judge conducting a b 2024Outside of the factors enumerated by the relevant statutes, 64 the best interest __________________________________________________________ 59 See UTAH CODE § 80-4-104(12)(a) (formerly id. § 78A-6-503(12) (2020)); In re J.P., 648 P.2d 1364, 1368 (Utah 1982) (“The best interest of the child has always been a paramount or ‘polar star’ principle in cases involving termination of parental rights . . . .”). 60 In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶ 35 , 463 P.3d 66 . 61 In re Z.C.W., 2021 UT App 98, ¶ 12 , 500 P.3d 94 . 62 In re C.L., 2007 UT 51 , ¶ 22, 166 P.3d 608 (“[A] juvenile court judge conducting a b | 1 | 2024–2024 |
In re A.H...
green
1 sentence2022The assessment of what is in a child’s best interest is, by definition, “a wide-ranging inquiry that asks a court to weigh the 20210353-CA 20210354-CA 17 2022 UT App 114 In re A.H. entirety of the circumstances” surrounding a child’s situation, including “the physical, intellectual, social, moral, and educational training and general welfare and happiness of the child.” See In re J.M., 2020 UT App 52, ¶¶ 35, 37 , 463 P.3d 66 (quotation simplified). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Utah Department of Transportation v. Ivers
green
2 sentences2015"The trial court"-they argue-"did not, therefore, have authority to conduct a wide-ranging inquiry, but was required to focus solely on the issues framed by this Court." 132 "[TJhe lower court must implement both the letter and the spirit of the mandate, taking into account the appellate court's opinion and the cireumstances it embraces." Utah Dep't of Transp. v. Ivers, 2009 UT 56, ¶ 12 , 218 P.3d 583 (alteration in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 2015"The trial court"-they argue-"did not, therefore, have authority to conduct a wide-ranging inquiry, but was required to focus solely on the issues framed by this Court." 132 "[TJhe lower court must implement both the letter and the spirit of the mandate, taking into account the appellate court's opinion and the cireumstances it embraces." Utah Dep't of Transp. v. Ivers, 2009 UT 56, ¶ 12 , 218 P.3d 583 (alteration in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.