Utah Code
Utah Code § 58-60-114 (2026)
Confidentiality -- Exemptions
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
UT-LEGle.utah.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Notwithstanding Title 63G, Chapter 2, Government Records Access and Management Act, a mental health therapist under this chapter may not disclose any confidential communication with a client or patient without the express written consent of:
the client or patient;
the parent or legal guardian of a minor client or patient; or
a person authorized to consent to the disclosure of the confidential communication by the client or patient in a written document:
that is signed by the client or the patient; and
in which the client's or the patient's signature is reasonably verifiable.
A mental health therapist under this chapter is not subject to Subsection (1) if:
the mental health therapist is permitted or required by state or federal law, rule, regulation, or order to report or disclose any confidential communication, including:
reporting under Title 26B, Chapter 6, Part 2, Abuse, Neglect, or Exploitation of a Vulnerable Adult;
reporting under Title 80, Chapter 2, Part 6, Child Abuse and Neglect Reports;
reporting under Title 78B, Chapter 3, Part 5, Limitation of Therapist's Duty to Warn; or
reporting of a communicable disease as required under Section 26B-7-206;
the disclosure is part of an administrative, civil, or criminal proceeding and is made under an exemption from evidentiary privilege under Rule 506, Utah Rules of Evidence; or
the disclosure is made under a generally recognized professional or ethical standard that authorizes or requires the disclosure.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1995–2008 · leading case: Salt Lake Child & Fam. Therapy Clinic, Inc. v. Frederick, 890 P.2d 1017 (Utah 1995).
Salt Lake Child & Fam. Therapy Clinic, Inc. v. Frederick, 890 P.2d 1017 (Utah 1995). “§ 58-39-10 (1994) and replaced it with a new section, Utah Code Ann. § 58-60-114 , effective July 1, 1994, under which the communications between Moriarty and the Clinic would not be subject to privilege in this matter.”
State v. Cardall, 1999 UT 51 (Utah 1999). “506(d)(1); see also Utah Code Ann. § 58-60-114 (2)(b). This alone appears to give Cardall the right to review S.”
Wickham v. Friel, 299 F. App'x 813 (10th Cir. 2008). “506(b); see also Utah Code Ann. § 58-60-114 (1) (West 2008) (prohibiting mental health therapist from disclosing confidential communications).”
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.