Utah Code » Title 63G, Chapter 2 — Government Records Access and Management Act; part 63G-2-4 — Appeals
Utah Code

Utah Code § 63G-2-404 (2026)

Judicial review

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A petition for judicial review of an order or decision, as allowed under this part, in Section 63G-2-209, or in Subsection 63G-2-701(6)(a)(ii), shall be filed no later than 30 days after the date of the order or decision, subject to Subsection (1)(b).
The time for a requester to file a petition for judicial review under Subsection (1)(a) is suspended for the period of time that:
begins the date the requester submits a request under Section 63A-12-204 for the government records ombudsman to mediate the dispute between the requester and the governmental entity; and
ends the earlier of the following dates:
the date that the government records ombudsman certifies in writing that the mediation is concluded; or
the date that the government records ombudsman certifies in writing that the mediation did not occur or was not concluded because of a lack of the required consent.
A petition for judicial review is a complaint governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and shall contain:
the petitioner's name and mailing address;
a copy of the director's order from which the appeal is taken, if the petitioner is seeking judicial review of an order of the director;
the name and mailing address of the governmental entity that issued the initial determination with a copy of that determination;
a request for relief specifying the type and extent of relief requested; and
a statement of the reasons why the petitioner is entitled to relief.
Except in exceptional circumstances, a petition for judicial review may not raise an issue that was not raised in the underlying appeal and order.
If the appeal is based on the denial of access to a protected record based on a claim of business confidentiality, the court shall allow the claimant of business confidentiality to provide to the court the reasons for the claim of business confidentiality.
All additional pleadings and proceedings in the district court are governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.
The district court may review the disputed records.
A review described in Subsection (5)(a) shall be in camera.
The court shall:
make the court's decision de novo, but, for a petition seeking judicial review of a director's order, allow introduction of evidence presented to the director;
determine all questions of fact and law without a jury; and
decide the issue at the earliest practical opportunity.
A court may remand a petition for judicial review to the director if:
the remand is to allow the director to decide an issue that:
involves access to a record; and
the director did not address in the proceeding that led to the petition for judicial review; and
the court determines that remanding to the director is in the best interests of justice.
Except as provided in Section 63G-2-406, the court may, upon consideration and weighing of the various interests and public policies pertinent to the classification and disclosure or nondisclosure, order the disclosure of information properly classified as private, controlled, or protected if the interest favoring access is greater than or equal to the interest favoring restriction of access.
The court shall consider and, where appropriate, limit the requester's use and further disclosure of the record in order to protect privacy interests in the case of private or controlled records, business confidentiality interests in the case of records protected under Subsections 63G-2-305(1) and (2), and privacy interests or the public interest in the case of other protected records.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2011–2024 · leading case: Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). · cites it 19× “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
Schroeder v. Utah Attorney Gen.'s Off., 2015 UT 77 (Utah 2015). · cites it 8× “Schroeder argues the district court incorrectly weighed the public policies pertinent to disclosure of the documents under Utah Code section 63G-2-404(8). Because balancing competing interests is a fact-intensive and "inherently discretionary task," we review the district…”
Big Game Forever v. Peterson, 2024 UT App 78 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 11× “§ 63G-2-404 (Supp. 2023) (detailing the process for pursuing a petition for judicial review of an order or decision of the Committee).”
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2016 UT 10 (Utah 2016). · cites it 2× “§ 63G-2-404. 46 . Id. § 63G-2-404(2)(b)(i)-Gi) (2009).”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Haik, 2014 UT App 193 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 13× “Consequently, a petition for judicial review and the subsequent proceedings involving appeals from the decisions of an appeals board must comply with the requirements of section 63G-2-404, which is titled "Judicial review," Utah Code Ann.”
McKitrick v. Gibson, 2021 UT 48 (Utah 2021). “And it directs decisionmakers at various stages of the record request and appeals processes to weigh the interests favoring disclosure against the interests favoring nondisclosure. See, e.g., id. § 63G-2- 401(6) (consideration by a chief administrative officer); id.”
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2014 UT App 219 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “The requester must do so within ‚30 days after the governmental entity has responded to the records request .”
Murray City v. Maese, 2011 UT App 73 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “See Utah Code Ann. § 63G-2-404(1)(b) (2008). However, under GRAMA, "[nJeither attorney fees nor costs shall be awarded for fees or costs incurred during administrative proceedings.”
Williams v. Dep't of Corr., 2011 UT App 280 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “§ 63G-2-404@)(b)0). Following any appeal to the records committee, a requester may seek judicial review of the records committee's decision by filing a petition "no later than 30 days after the date of the records committee's order," id.”
Williams v. Dep't of Corr., 2016 UT App 156 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “4 ¶10 Williams next argues that the contract attorneys were required to assist him in preparing, an appeal under the Utah Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA), see Utah.”
Sherratt v. Dep't of Corr., 2016 UT App 68 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “The district court obliged the request and, viewing the entire filing as one for extraordinary relief, dismissed the case, reasoning that because Sherratt had a plain, adequate, and speedy remedy available to him under Utah Code section 63G-2-404, his petition for extraordinary…”
Gordon v. Nostrom, 2024 UT 18 (Utah 2024). · cites it 2× “” UTAH CODE § 63G-2-404(1)(a). Part 4 and subsection -701(6)(a)(ii) allow for judicial review when • a requester or interested party appeals “an access denial,” see id.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(1) — 1 case
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Haik, 2014 UT App 193 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “Consequently, a petition for judicial review and the subsequent proceedings involving appeals from the decisions of an appeals board must comply with the requirements of section 63G-2-404, which is titled "Judicial review," Utah Code Ann.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(1)(a) — 3 cases
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
Williams v. Dep't of Corr., 2011 UT App 280 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “§ 63G-2-404@)(b)0). Following any appeal to the records committee, a requester may seek judicial review of the records committee's decision by filing a petition "no later than 30 days after the date of the records committee's order," id.”
Gordon v. Nostrom, 2024 UT 18 (Utah 2024). “” UTAH CODE § 63G-2-404(1)(a). Part 4 and subsection -701(6)(a)(ii) allow for judicial review when • a requester or interested party appeals “an access denial,” see id.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(1)(b) — 1 case
Murray City v. Maese, 2011 UT App 73 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “See Utah Code Ann. § 63G-2-404(1)(b) (2008). However, under GRAMA, "[nJeither attorney fees nor costs shall be awarded for fees or costs incurred during administrative proceedings.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(1)(c) — 1 case
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(1)(d) — 1 case
Williams v. Dep't of Corr., 2011 UT App 280 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “§ 63G-2-404@)(b)0). Following any appeal to the records committee, a requester may seek judicial review of the records committee's decision by filing a petition "no later than 30 days after the date of the records committee's order," id.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(2)(a) — 2 cases
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Haik, 2014 UT App 193 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “Consequently, a petition for judicial review and the subsequent proceedings involving appeals from the decisions of an appeals board must comply with the requirements of section 63G-2-404, which is titled "Judicial review," Utah Code Ann.”
Williams v. Dep't of Corr., 2016 UT App 156 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “4 ¶10 Williams next argues that the contract attorneys were required to assist him in preparing, an appeal under the Utah Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA), see Utah.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(2)(b) — 1 case
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2014 UT App 219 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “The requester must do so within ‚30 days after the governmental entity has responded to the records request .”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(2)(b)(i) — 2 cases
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2016 UT 10 (Utah 2016). “§ 63G-2-404. 46 . Id. § 63G-2-404(2)(b)(i)-Gi) (2009).”
Williams v. Dep't of Corr., 2011 UT App 280 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “§ 63G-2-404@)(b)0). Following any appeal to the records committee, a requester may seek judicial review of the records committee's decision by filing a petition "no later than 30 days after the date of the records committee's order," id.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(3) — 1 case
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(3)(b) — 1 case
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(7)(a) — 4 cases
Big Game Forever v. Peterson, 2024 UT App 78 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). “§ 63G-2-404 (Supp. 2023) (detailing the process for pursuing a petition for judicial review of an order or decision of the Committee).”
McKitrick v. Gibson, 2021 UT 48 (Utah 2021). “And it directs decisionmakers at various stages of the record request and appeals processes to weigh the interests favoring disclosure against the interests favoring nondisclosure. See, e.g., id. § 63G-2- 401(6) (consideration by a chief administrative officer); id.”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
Utah Legal Clinic v. Salt Lake City Corp., 2019 UT App 58 (Utah Ct. App. 2019).
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(7)(b) — 1 case
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(7)(c) — 1 case
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(8) — 2 cases
Schroeder v. Utah Attorney Gen.'s Off., 2015 UT 77 (Utah 2015). “Schroeder argues the district court incorrectly weighed the public policies pertinent to disclosure of the documents under Utah Code section 63G-2-404(8). Because balancing competing interests is a fact-intensive and "inherently discretionary task," we review the district…”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Haik, 2014 UT App 193 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “Consequently, a petition for judicial review and the subsequent proceedings involving appeals from the decisions of an appeals board must comply with the requirements of section 63G-2-404, which is titled "Judicial review," Utah Code Ann.”
— Utah Code § 63G-2-404(8)(a) — 2 cases
Schroeder v. Utah Attorney Gen.'s Off., 2015 UT 77 (Utah 2015). “Schroeder argues the district court incorrectly weighed the public policies pertinent to disclosure of the documents under Utah Code section 63G-2-404(8). Because balancing competing interests is a fact-intensive and "inherently discretionary task," we review the district…”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-2-404. ¶ 26 GRAMA also allows, but does not require, a political subdivision such as the City to adopt its own internal appeals process.”
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.