Utah Code
Utah Code § 78B-2-201 (2026)
Actions by the state
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
UT-LEGle.utah.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The state may not bring an action against any person for or with respect to any real property, its issues or profits, based upon the state's right or title to the real property, unless:
the right or title to the property accrued within seven years before any action or other proceeding is commenced; or
the state or those from whom it claims received all or a portion of the rents and profits from the real property within the immediately preceding seven years.
The statute of limitations in this section runs from the date on which the state or those from whom it claims received actual notice of the facts giving rise to the action.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2008–2023 · leading case: Garfield Cnty. v. United States, 2017 UT 41 (Utah 2017).
Garfield Cnty. v. United States, 2017 UT 41 (Utah 2017). “8 ¶ 5 On June 27, 2014, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), which acts as a limited permissive intervenor in the Kane County and Garfield County cases, filed a memorandum with the United States District Court in support of the United States’ Motion for Partial…”
State ex rel. Sch. & Institutional Trust Land Admin. v. Mathis, 223 P.3d 1119 (Utah 2009). “Utah Code Ann. § 78B-2-201 (2008). . The State argues that any ruling based on the statute of limitations contains an implicit determination that the underlying conveyance was valid and therefore that we must determine both that the conveyance to the Mathises was valid and that…”
Davis v. Provo City Corp., 2008 UT 59 (Utah 2008). “A statute of limitations contains phrases such as "may not bring an action," Utah Code Ann. § 78B-2-201 (2008), "actions .”
State Ex Rel. Sch. & Inst. Trust Land Admn. v. Mathis, 2009 UT 85 (Utah 2009). “NOTES [1] Utah Code Ann. § 78B-2-201 (2008). [2] The State argues that any ruling based on the statute of limitations contains an implicit determination that the underlying conveyance was valid and therefore that we must determine both that the conveyance to the Mathises was…”
Est. of Higley v. State, Dep't of Transp., 2010 UT App 227 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). “" Second, the Estate cites to Utah Code section 78B-2-201, see Utah Code Ann. § 78B-2-201 (2008), which is located within the relevant part of the chapter on statutes of limitations-Part 2, which is entitled "Real Property.”
Kane Cnty. (2) v. United States (D. Utah 2019). “On May 30, 2014, the United States filed a Motion for Partial Dismissal, which asserted the claims in Garfield County were barred by Utah Code Ann. § 78B-2-201 on statute of limitations grounds.”
Abdo v. Reyes, 91 F. Supp. 3d 1225 (D. Utah 2015). “INTRODUCTION Michael Abdo and SUWA (collectively “SUWA” unless other stated) filed suit in State court seeking a declaration that the State and Tooele County’s suit against the United States to quiet title in certain roads violates Utah Code § 78B-2-201 and Article 7, § 16 of…”
Kane Cnty. (2) v. United States (D. Utah 2023). “Statute of Limitations Not Applicable for Quiet Title Actions The United States asserts Section 78B-2-201 of the Utah Code bars the State’s claims on nine roads1 because the State brought suit more than seven years after the United States disputed title.”
Garfield Cnty. (1) v. United States of Am. Dep't of the Interior (D. Utah 2023). “Statute of Limitations Not Applicable for Quiet Title Actions The United States asserts Section 78B-2-201 of the Utah Code bars the State’s claims on nine roads1 because the State brought suit more than seven years after the United States disputed title.”
Utah Code § 78B-2-201(1): 1 case
Garfield Cnty. v. United States, 2017 UT 41 (Utah 2017). “8 ¶ 5 On June 27, 2014, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), which acts as a limited permissive intervenor in the Kane County and Garfield County cases, filed a memorandum with the United States District Court in support of the United States’ Motion for Partial…”
Utah Code § 78B-2-201(1)(a): 2 cases
Kane Cnty. (2) v. United States (D. Utah 2023). “Statute of Limitations Not Applicable for Quiet Title Actions The United States asserts Section 78B-2-201 of the Utah Code bars the State’s claims on nine roads1 because the State brought suit more than seven years after the United States disputed title.”
Garfield Cnty. (1) v. United States of Am. Dep't of the Interior (D. Utah 2023). “Statute of Limitations Not Applicable for Quiet Title Actions The United States asserts Section 78B-2-201 of the Utah Code bars the State’s claims on nine roads1 because the State brought suit more than seven years after the United States disputed title.”
Utah Code § 78B-2-201(2): 1 case
Garfield Cnty. v. United States, 2017 UT 41 (Utah 2017). “8 ¶ 5 On June 27, 2014, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), which acts as a limited permissive intervenor in the Kane County and Garfield County cases, filed a memorandum with the United States District Court in support of the United States’ Motion for Partial…”
Utah Code § 78B-2-201(l): 1 case
Abdo v. Reyes, 91 F. Supp. 3d 1225 (D. Utah 2015). “INTRODUCTION Michael Abdo and SUWA (collectively “SUWA” unless other stated) filed suit in State court seeking a declaration that the State and Tooele County’s suit against the United States to quiet title in certain roads violates Utah Code § 78B-2-201 and Article 7, § 16 of…”
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.