Utah Code » Title 7, Chapter 2 — Possession of Depository Institution by Commissioner
Utah Code

Utah Code § 7-2-23 (2026)

Limitation of action -- Tolling of period

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
If applicable law, an order entered in any proceeding, any cause of action arising under this chapter, or an agreement, fixes a period within which the institution, the commissioner, or any receiver or liquidator appointed under Section 7-2-9 may commence an action, and the period has not expired before the date of possession by the commissioner, the receiver or liquidator may commence an action only before the later of:
the end of the period;
three years after the date of appointment of a receiver or liquidator under Section 7-2-9; or
three years after the date of possession by the commissioner.
No statute of limitations as to any cause of action against an officer or director of a depository institution begins to run as to the commissioner or any receiver or liquidator appointed under Section 7-2-9 until the date the commissioner takes possession of the institution under this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1990–2014 · leading case: Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Paul, 735 F. Supp. 375 (D. Utah 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Paul, 735 F. Supp. 375 (D. Utah 1990). · cites it 7× “Utah codified the adverse domination doctrine in Utah Code Ann. § 7-2-23 , effective May 1, 1989, which provides in relevant part: (2) No statute of limitations as to any cause of action against an officer or director of a depository institution begins to run as to the…”
Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Williams, 60 F. Supp. 3d 1209 (D. Utah 2014). · cites it 4× “Alternatively, regardless of when the claims accrued, the court notes that Utah Code § 7-2-23(2), which is simply a codification of the "adverse domination” doctrine, would apply in this case.”
— Utah Code § 7-2-23(2) — 1 case
Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Williams, 60 F. Supp. 3d 1209 (D. Utah 2014). “Alternatively, regardless of when the claims accrued, the court notes that Utah Code § 7-2-23(2), which is simply a codification of the "adverse domination” doctrine, would apply in this 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.