Utah Code

Utah Code § 41-12a-301 (2026)

Definitions -- Requirement of owner's or operator's security -- Exceptions

✓ current as of May 2026

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

As used in this section:

"Highway" means the same as that term is defined in Section 41-1a-102.

"Local education agency" or "LEA" means the same as that term is defined in Section 53E-1-102.

"Quasi-public road or parking area" means the same as that term is defined in Section 41-6a-214.

Except as provided in Subsection (5):

every resident owner of a motor vehicle shall maintain owner's or operator's security in effect at any time that the motor vehicle is operated on a highway or on a quasi-public road or parking area within the state; and

every nonresident owner of a motor vehicle that has been physically present in this state for:

90 or fewer days during the preceding 365 days shall maintain the type and amount of owner's or operator's security required in his place of residence, in effect continuously throughout the period the motor vehicle remains within Utah; or

more than 90 days during the preceding 365 days shall thereafter maintain owner's or operator's security in effect continuously throughout the period the motor vehicle remains within Utah.

Except as provided in Subsection (5), the state and all of the state's political subdivisions and their respective departments, institutions, or agencies shall maintain owner's or operator's security in effect continuously for their motor vehicles.

Any other state is considered a nonresident owner of its motor vehicles and is subject to Subsection (2)(b).

The United States, any political subdivision of it, or any of its agencies may maintain owner's or operator's security in effect for their motor vehicles.

Owner's or operator's security is not required for any of the following:

off-highway vehicles registered under Section 41-22-3 when operated either:

on a highway designated as open for off-highway vehicle use; or

in the manner prescribed by Subsections 41-22-10.3(1) through (3);

off-highway implements of husbandry operated in the manner prescribed by Subsections 41-22-5.5(3) through (5);

electric assisted bicycles as defined under Section 41-6a-102;

motor assisted scooters as defined under Section 41-6a-102;

electric personal assistive mobility devices as defined under Section 41-6a-102; or

an LEA, for a school bus that the LEA authorizes a state entity or political subdivision of the state to use.

If an LEA authorizes a state entity or political subdivision of the state to use a school bus:

the state entity or political subdivision shall maintain owner's or operator's security during the term of the school bus use in an amount that is greater than or equal to any governmental immunity liability limit;

the state entity or the political subdivision shall indemnify and defend the LEA for any claim that arises from the school bus use including a claim directed at the LEA, unless the claim arises from the sole negligence of the LEA; and

if the school district maintains owner's or operator's security for the school bus during the term of school bus use, the owner's and operator's security maintained by the state entity or political subdivision of the state is primary to the owner's and operator's security maintained by the LEA.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases, 1994–2020 · leading case: Calhoun v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2004 UT 56 (Utah 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Calhoun v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2004 UT 56 (Utah 2004). · cites it 41× “As the named insured, I understand and certify that the named person excluded from coverage, has in fact, satisfied the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of Section 41-12a-301, independently of the named insured’s proof of owner’s or operator’s security.”

Arredondo v. Avis Rent a Car Sys., Inc., 2001 UT 29 (Utah 2001). · cites it 20× “Section 31A-22-302 provided, in relevant part, as follows: (1) Every policy of insurance or combination of policies purchased to satisfy the owner's or operator's security requirement of Section 41-12a-301 shall include: (a) motor vehicle liability coverage under Sections…”

Li v. Enter. Rent-A-Car Co. of Utah, 2006 UT 80 (Utah 2006). · cites it 5× “{[ 31 Chief Justice DURHAM, Associate Chief Justice WILKINS, Justice PARRISH, and Justice NEHRING concur in Justice DURRANT's opinion.”

Dairyland Ins. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 882 P.2d 1143 (Utah 1994). · cites it 6× “if each person excluded from coverage satisfies the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of Section 41-12a-301, independently of the named insured’s proof of owner’s or operator’s security.”

Neel v. State, 889 P.2d 922 (Utah 1995). · cites it 5× “The No-Fault Act requires that “[e]very policy of insurance or combination of policies, purchased to satisfy the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of Section 41-12a-301 ... shall also include personal injury protection.”

Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Versaw, 2004 UT 73 (Utah 2004). · cites it 2× “Section 81A-22-802 states: "(1) Every policy of insurance or combination of policies purchased to satisfy the owner's or operator's security requirement of Section 41-12a-301 shall include: (a) motor vehicle liability coverage under Sections 31A-22-8303 and - 81A-22-804 .”

State v. Biggs, 2007 UT App 261 (Utah Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “§ 41-12a-301(2)(a) (emphasis added). Defendant apparently argues that because the statute allows either owner's or operator's insurance on her vehicle, she would have been lawfully insured had Tate independently had an operator's insurance policy.”

Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 925 P.2d 1270 (Utah Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 6× “The liability insurance policies issued by Universal Underwriters to Gus Paulos Chevrolet and Hayes Brothers Buick and by State Farm to Jarman and Aline were all purchased to satisfy the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of section 41-12a-301 of the Utah Code. See Utah…”

Dircks v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Am., 2017 UT 73 (Utah 2017). · cites it 2× “See UTAH CODE§ 41-12a-301(2)(a) ("[E]very resident owner of a motor vehicle shall maintain owner's or operator's security in effect at any time that the motor vehicle is operated on a highway or on a quasi-public road or parking area within the state[.”

Peterson v. Utah Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 927 P.2d 192 (Utah Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “The relevant portions of Utah's Insurance Code provide, (1) Every policy of insurance or combination of policies purchased to satisfy the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of Section 41-12a-301 shall include: [[Image here]] (c) underinsured motorist coverage under…”

Bear River Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wall, 937 P.2d 1282 (Utah Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Personal injury protection benefits include benefits for the reasonable value of medical expenses, not to exceed a total of $3000 per person; benefits for loss of income and household services; funeral or burial benefits; and death benefits.”

West Valley City v. Temblador-Topete, 2020 UT App 64 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “” It found that Officer “received information from UCJIS that [Temblador- Topete] drove a vehicle that was not insured,” in violation of Utah Code section 41-12a-301. The court stated that Officer “reasonably believed that the vehicle was uninsured.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

— Utah Code § 41-12a-301(2) — 2 cases

Li v. Enter. Rent-A-Car Co. of Utah, 2006 UT 80 (Utah 2006). “{[ 31 Chief Justice DURHAM, Associate Chief Justice WILKINS, Justice PARRISH, and Justice NEHRING concur in Justice DURRANT's opinion.”

Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 925 P.2d 1270 (Utah Ct. App. 1996). “The liability insurance policies issued by Universal Underwriters to Gus Paulos Chevrolet and Hayes Brothers Buick and by State Farm to Jarman and Aline were all purchased to satisfy the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of section 41-12a-301 of the Utah Code. See Utah…”

— Utah Code § 41-12a-301(2)(a) — 4 cases

Calhoun v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2004 UT 56 (Utah 2004). “As the named insured, I understand and certify that the named person excluded from coverage, has in fact, satisfied the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of Section 41-12a-301, independently of the named insured’s proof of owner’s or operator’s security.”

State v. Biggs, 2007 UT App 261 (Utah Ct. App. 2007). “§ 41-12a-301(2)(a) (emphasis added). Defendant apparently argues that because the statute allows either owner's or operator's insurance on her vehicle, she would have been lawfully insured had Tate independently had an operator's insurance policy.”

Dircks v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Am., 2017 UT 73 (Utah 2017). “See UTAH CODE§ 41-12a-301(2)(a) ("[E]very resident owner of a motor vehicle shall maintain owner's or operator's security in effect at any time that the motor vehicle is operated on a highway or on a quasi-public road or parking area within the state[.”

— Utah Code § 41-12a-301(3)(a) — 1 case

Neel v. State, 889 P.2d 922 (Utah 1995). “The No-Fault Act requires that “[e]very policy of insurance or combination of policies, purchased to satisfy the owner’s or operator’s security requirement of Section 41-12a-301 ... shall also include personal injury protection.”

— Utah Code § 41-12a-301(4) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 41-12a-301(5) — 1 case

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.