Utah Code
Utah Code § 63G-4-402 (2026)
Judicial review -- Informal adjudicative proceedings
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
UT-LEGle.utah.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The district courts have jurisdiction to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings, except that the juvenile courts have jurisdiction over all final agency actions relating to:
the removal or placement of children in state custody;
the support of children under Subsection (1)(a)(i) as determined administratively under Section 78A-6-356; and
supported findings of abuse or neglect made by the Division of Child and Family Services.
Venue for judicial review of informal adjudicative proceedings shall be as provided in the statute governing the agency or, in the absence of such a venue provision, in the county where the petitioner resides or maintains the petitioner's principal place of business.
The petition for judicial review of informal adjudicative proceedings shall be a complaint governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and shall include:
the name and mailing address of the party seeking judicial review;
the name and mailing address of the respondent agency;
the title and date of the final agency action to be reviewed, together with a copy, summary, or brief description of the agency action;
identification of the persons who were parties in the informal adjudicative proceedings that led to the agency action;
a copy of the written agency order from the informal proceeding;
facts demonstrating that the party seeking judicial review is entitled to obtain judicial review;
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.
All additional pleadings and proceedings in the district court are governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court, without a jury, shall determine all questions of fact and law and any constitutional issue presented in the pleadings.
The Utah Rules of Evidence apply in judicial proceedings under this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: Haik v. Jones, 2018 UT 39 (Utah 2018).
Haik v. Jones, 2018 UT 39 (Utah 2018). “Utah Code section 63G-4-402(1)(a) provides that "[t]he district courts have jurisdiction to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings .”
Christensen v. Tax Comm'n, 2020 UT 45 (Utah 2020). “59-1-601, incorporates Utah Code Section 63G-4-402 which allows judicial review by a district court of final agency actions that result from an informal adjudicative proceeding.”
Friends of Great Salt Lake v. Utah Dep't of Nat. Resources, 2017 UT 15 (Utah 2017). “See Utah Code § 63G-4-402(l)(a) (authorizing action “to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings”); id.”
V.M. v. Dcfs, 2020 UT App 35 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 63G-4-402 (2016) (explaining that juvenile courts have jurisdiction over all state agency actions relating to “substantiated findings of abuse or neglect made by the Division of Child and Family Services”).”
Muddy Boys, Inc. v. Dep't of Com., 2019 UT App 33 (Utah Ct. App. 2019). “§ 63G-4-402 (using "district courts" in subsection (1)(a), and then "court" in subsequent subsections).”
Meadow Valley Contractors, Inc. v. State Dep't of Transp., 266 P.3d 671 (Utah 2011). “See Uta Copz Ann § 63G-4-402(1)(a) (Supp. 2010) ("The district courts have jurisdiction to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings.”
Taylor-west Weber Water Improvement v. Olds, 2009 UT 86 (Utah 2009). “§ 63G-4-402(1)(a). The district court accomplishes this review by conducting a de novo trial governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.”
Beller v. Rolfe, 2008 UT 68 (Utah 2008). “Individuals whose driver licenses have been revoked are entitled to seek judicial review.”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Res., 2018 UT 62 (Utah 2018). “§ 63G-4-402 (emphasis added). ¶ 69 This distinction is worth consideration.”
Bryner v. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 2016 UT App 199 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “Because the proceedings before the Division were informal, the district court was required to conduct a trial de novo to determine all questions of fact and law and any constitutional issues presented by the pleadings filed in that court.”
Friends of Great Salt Lake v. Utah Dep't of Nat. Resources, 2010 UT 20 (Utah 2010). “Our Caselaw Suggests We Look to the Formality of the Underlying Proceeding to Determine Jurisdiction ¶ 14 UAPA requires that final formal administrative adjudicative proceedings be reviewed by this court or the court of appeals and final informal administrative adjudicative…”
Taylor-West Weber Water Improvement Dist. v. Olds, 224 P.3d 709 (Utah 2009). “§ 63G-4-402(2)(b). Further, no separate statute mandates any additional requirements for potential intervenors.”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(1) — 1 case
Ho v. Dep't of Com., 2023 UT App 87 (Utah Ct. App. 2023).
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(1)(a) — 12 cases
Haik v. Jones, 2018 UT 39 (Utah 2018). “Utah Code section 63G-4-402(1)(a) provides that "[t]he district courts have jurisdiction to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings .”
Christensen v. Tax Comm'n, 2020 UT 45 (Utah 2020). “59-1-601, incorporates Utah Code Section 63G-4-402 which allows judicial review by a district court of final agency actions that result from an informal adjudicative proceeding.”
Meadow Valley Contractors, Inc. v. State Dep't of Transp., 266 P.3d 671 (Utah 2011). “See Uta Copz Ann § 63G-4-402(1)(a) (Supp. 2010) ("The district courts have jurisdiction to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings.”
Taylor-west Weber Water Improvement v. Olds, 2009 UT 86 (Utah 2009). “§ 63G-4-402(1)(a). The district court accomplishes this review by conducting a de novo trial governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.”
V.M. v. Dcfs, 2020 UT App 35 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 63G-4-402 (2016) (explaining that juvenile courts have jurisdiction over all state agency actions relating to “substantiated findings of abuse or neglect made by the Division of Child and Family Services”).”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(1)(a)(iii) — 1 case
V.M. v. Dcfs, 2020 UT App 35 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 63G-4-402 (2016) (explaining that juvenile courts have jurisdiction over all state agency actions relating to “substantiated findings of abuse or neglect made by the Division of Child and Family Services”).”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(2)(a) — 1 case
Baker v. Labor Comm'n, 2015 UT App 127 (Utah Ct. App. 2015).
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(2)(b) — 3 cases
Taylor-west Weber Water Improvement v. Olds, 2009 UT 86 (Utah 2009). “§ 63G-4-402(1)(a). The district court accomplishes this review by conducting a de novo trial governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.”
V.M. v. Dcfs, 2020 UT App 35 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 63G-4-402 (2016) (explaining that juvenile courts have jurisdiction over all state agency actions relating to “substantiated findings of abuse or neglect made by the Division of Child and Family Services”).”
Taylor-West Weber Water Improvement Dist. v. Olds, 224 P.3d 709 (Utah 2009). “§ 63G-4-402(2)(b). Further, no separate statute mandates any additional requirements for potential intervenors.”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(3)(a) — 1 case
Bryner v. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 2016 UT App 199 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “Because the proceedings before the Division were informal, the district court was required to conduct a trial de novo to determine all questions of fact and law and any constitutional issues presented by the pleadings filed in that court.”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(l) — 1 case
Friends of Great Salt Lake v. Utah Dep't of Nat. Resources, 2010 UT 20 (Utah 2010). “Our Caselaw Suggests We Look to the Formality of the Underlying Proceeding to Determine Jurisdiction ¶ 14 UAPA requires that final formal administrative adjudicative proceedings be reviewed by this court or the court of appeals and final informal administrative adjudicative…”
— Utah Code § 63G-4-402(l)(a) — 2 cases
Friends of Great Salt Lake v. Utah Dep't of Nat. Resources, 2017 UT 15 (Utah 2017). “See Utah Code § 63G-4-402(l)(a) (authorizing action “to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings”); id.”
Bryner v. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 2016 UT App 199 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “Because the proceedings before the Division were informal, the district court was required to conduct a trial de novo to determine all questions of fact and law and any constitutional issues presented by the pleadings filed in that court.”
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.