Utah Code § 13-7-3

Equal right in business establishments, places of public accommodation, and enterprises regulated by the state

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal and are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, goods and services in all business establishments and in all places of public accommodation, and by all enterprises regulated by the state of every kind whatsoever, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, pregnancy, religion, ancestry or national origin.

Nothing in this act shall be construed to deny any person the right to regulate the operation of a business establishment or place of public accommodation or an enterprise regulated by the state in a manner which applies uniformly to all persons without regard to race, color, sex, pregnancy, religion, ancestry, or national origin; or to deny any religious organization the right to regulate the operation and procedures of its establishments.

Nothing in this act regulates business website accessibility.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: World Peace Movement of America v. Newspaper Agency Corp.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

World Peace Movement of America v. Newspaper Agency Corp. (1994) utah · cites it 36× “" Utah Code Ann. § 13-7-3 . [6] The Act generally prohibits business establishments and other covered entities from discriminating against "persons" based on certain suspect classifications, including religion.”

MacArthur v. San Juan County (2005) utd · cites it 6× “(2001)) Utah Code Ann. § 13-7-3 (2001) reads: 13-7-3.”

Beynon v. St. George-Dixie Lodge 1743 (1993) utah · cites it 6× “Utah Code Ann. § 13-7-3 (emphasis added).”

Sampson v. HB Boys (2024) utahctapp · cites it 4× “Utah Code § 13-7-3. The UCRA then creates the following public rights: 20221003-CA 7 2024 UT App 56 Sampson v.”

Plascencia v. City of St. George (2010) utd · cites it 2× “George Discrimination, Utah Code § 13-7-3. Plaintiff does not oppose summary judgement on its Third, Fourth or Fifth causes of action, therefore the Court will grant summary judgment on these claims.”

Kaveh v. Starbucks Corporation (2025) utd · cites it 2× “However, where Plaintiffs do not allege the religion of any potential comparator or assert facts supporting an inference of religious discrimination, 87 Utah Code § 13-7-3(1). 88 See Sussman v. Blazin Wings, Inc.”

— Utah Code § 13-7-3(1) — 1 case

Kaveh v. Starbucks Corporation (2025) utd “However, where Plaintiffs do not allege the religion of any potential comparator or assert facts supporting an inference of religious discrimination, 87 Utah Code § 13-7-3(1). 88 See Sussman v. Blazin Wings, Inc.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.