Utah Code » Title 63G, Chapter 4 — Administrative Procedures Act; part 63G-4-4 — Judicial Review
Utah Code

Utah Code § 63G-4-401 (2026)

Judicial review -- Exhaustion of administrative remedies -- Petition for 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 party aggrieved may obtain judicial review of final agency action, as described in Section 63G-4-403, except in actions where judicial review is expressly prohibited by statute.
A party may seek judicial review only after exhausting all administrative remedies available, except that:
a party seeking judicial review need not exhaust administrative remedies if this chapter or any other statute states that exhaustion is not required;
the court may relieve a party seeking judicial review of the requirement to exhaust any or all administrative remedies if:
the administrative remedies are inadequate; or
exhaustion of remedies would result in irreparable harm disproportionate to the public benefit derived from requiring exhaustion.
Except as provided in Subsection (3)(c), a party shall file a petition for judicial review of final agency action within 30 days after the day on which the order:
constituting the final agency action is issued; or
is considered to have been issued under Subsection 63G-4-302(3)(b).
The petition shall:
name the agency and all other appropriate parties as respondents; and
meet the form requirements specified in this chapter.
If a party files a petition for judicial review of a final agency action resulting from a formal adjudicative proceeding within the 30-day time period described in Subsection (3)(a), any other party to the action may file a petition for judicial review if the petition is filed within the time period permitted for a cross petition under Rule 14 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2009–2025 · leading case: Christensen v. Tax Comm'n, 2020 UT 45 (Utah 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Christensen v. Tax Comm'n, 2020 UT 45 (Utah 2020). · cites it 11× “But the ALJ also opined that the Commission should waive the __________________________________________________________ 3 We note that the Legislature amended the tax code a few months after the district court’s order.”
Ramsay v. Kane Cnty. Human Resource Special Serv. Dist., 2014 UT 5 (Utah 2014). · cites it 6× “¶ 17 Because Plaintiffs’ claims were subject to the exhaustion requirement under Utah Code section 63G-4-401, none of the exceptions to exhaustion apply, and Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies, we lack subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims.”
Cook Assocs.., Inc. v. Utah Sch. & Institutional Trust Lands Admin., 2010 UT App 284 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “SITLA contends that Cook cannot contest the reasonableness of the rental increase because Cook failed to appeal the 2008 increase to the Board and, therefore, did not exhaust its administrative remedies as required by Utah Code section 63G-4-401, see Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401…”
Tooele Cnty. v. Erda Cmty. Ass'n, 2022 UT App 123 (Utah Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 5× “Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(2) (providing that, under the Utah Administrative Procedures Act, there is an exception to the exhaustion requirement where exhaustion “would result in irreparable harm disproportionate to the public benefit derived from requiring exhaustion”).”
Frito-Lay v. Utah Labor Comm'n, 2009 UT 71 (Utah 2009). · cites it 2× “Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(1) to (2) (providing that an aggrieved party "may obtain judicial review of final agency action .”
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2016 UT 10 (Utah 2016). “§ 63G-4-401(3)(a). 40 . Id. § 63G-4-102(9).”
Zions Mgmt. Servs. v. Record, 2013 UT 36 (Utah 2013). · cites it 2× “See Utax Cope § 63G-4-401 to -405. 34 . 2008 UT 19, ¶ 18 , 179 P.”
Taylor-west Weber Water Improvement v. Olds, 2009 UT 86 (Utah 2009). · cites it 4× “Utah Code Ann. §§ 63G-4-401 to 402 (2008).”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Haik, 2019 UT App 4 (Utah Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “" Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(2) (LexisNexis 2016); see also id.”
Ostler v. Ret. Bd., 2017 UT App 96 (Utah Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “See Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401 (LexisNexis 2016) (discussing the exhaustion requirement).”
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2014 UT App 219 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “If the agency does not respond within twenty days, ‚the request for reconsideration shall be considered to be denied.‛ Id. § 63G-4-302(3)(b).”
C.R. England v. Hakem, 2021 UT App 108 (Utah Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 4× “See Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(3)(a). ¶11 Thus, parties wishing to challenge any part of an agency decision governed by UAPA must file their own petition for review within 30 days of the agency’s final order.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
— Utah Code § 63G-4-401(1) — 2 cases
Frito-Lay v. Utah Labor Comm'n, 2009 UT 71 (Utah 2009). “Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(1) to (2) (providing that an aggrieved party "may obtain judicial review of final agency action .”
Laumalie Ma'Oni'Oni Free Wesleyan Church of Tonga v. Ma'Afu, 2019 UT App 41 (Utah Ct. App. 2019).
— Utah Code § 63G-4-401(2) — 14 cases
Christensen v. Tax Comm'n, 2020 UT 45 (Utah 2020). “But the ALJ also opined that the Commission should waive the __________________________________________________________ 3 We note that the Legislature amended the tax code a few months after the district court’s order.”
Ramsay v. Kane Cnty. Human Resource Special Serv. Dist., 2014 UT 5 (Utah 2014). “¶ 17 Because Plaintiffs’ claims were subject to the exhaustion requirement under Utah Code section 63G-4-401, none of the exceptions to exhaustion apply, and Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies, we lack subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims.”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Haik, 2019 UT App 4 (Utah Ct. App. 2019). “" Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(2) (LexisNexis 2016); see also id.”
Tooele Cnty. v. Erda Cmty. Ass'n, 2022 UT App 123 (Utah Ct. App. 2022). “Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(2) (providing that, under the Utah Administrative Procedures Act, there is an exception to the exhaustion requirement where exhaustion “would result in irreparable harm disproportionate to the public benefit derived from requiring exhaustion”).”
Zions Mgmt. Servs. v. Record, 2013 UT 36 (Utah 2013). “See Utax Cope § 63G-4-401 to -405. 34 . 2008 UT 19, ¶ 18 , 179 P.”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-401(2)(a) — 1 case
Christensen v. Tax Comm'n, 2020 UT 45 (Utah 2020). “But the ALJ also opined that the Commission should waive the __________________________________________________________ 3 We note that the Legislature amended the tax code a few months after the district court’s order.”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-401(2)(b) — 6 cases
Ramsay v. Kane Cnty. Human Resource Special Serv. Dist., 2014 UT 5 (Utah 2014). “¶ 17 Because Plaintiffs’ claims were subject to the exhaustion requirement under Utah Code section 63G-4-401, none of the exceptions to exhaustion apply, and Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies, we lack subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims.”
Tooele Cnty. v. Erda Cmty. Ass'n, 2022 UT App 123 (Utah Ct. App. 2022). “Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(2) (providing that, under the Utah Administrative Procedures Act, there is an exception to the exhaustion requirement where exhaustion “would result in irreparable harm disproportionate to the public benefit derived from requiring exhaustion”).”
Repub. Outdoor Advert. v. Utah Dep't of Transp., Div. II, 258 P.3d 619 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).
Ramsay v. Kane Cnty., 2014 UT 5 (Utah 2014).
Repub. Outdoor Adver. v. Dept. of Transp., 2011 UT App 198 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).
— Utah Code § 63G-4-401(3)(a) — 4 cases
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2016 UT 10 (Utah 2016). “§ 63G-4-401(3)(a). 40 . Id. § 63G-4-102(9).”
C.R. England v. Hakem, 2021 UT App 108 (Utah Ct. App. 2021). “See Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-401(3)(a). ¶11 Thus, parties wishing to challenge any part of an agency decision governed by UAPA must file their own petition for review within 30 days of the agency’s final order.”
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2014 UT App 219 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “If the agency does not respond within twenty days, ‚the request for reconsideration shall be considered to be denied.‛ Id. § 63G-4-302(3)(b).”
Labor Comm'n v. Price, 2020 UT App 24 (Utah Ct. App. 2020).
— Utah Code § 63G-4-401(8)(a) — 3 cases
Monarrez v. Utah Dep't of Transp., 2014 UT App 219 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “If the agency does not respond within twenty days, ‚the request for reconsideration shall be considered to be denied.‛ Id. § 63G-4-302(3)(b).”
Pentskiff Interpreting Servs. v. Dep't of Health, Div. of Medicaid & Health Fin. Off. of Formal Hearings, 305 P.3d 218 (Utah Ct. App. 2013).
Campbell v. Dep't of Workforce Servs., 2011 UT App 81 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).
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.