Utah Code » Title 78B, Chapter 6 — Particular Proceedings; part 78B-6-3 — Contempt
Utah Code

Utah Code § 78B-6-302 (2026)

Contempt in immediate presence of court -- Summary action -- Outside presence of court -- procedure

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
When a contempt is committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, or judge at chambers, it may be punished summarily. An order shall be made, reciting the facts occurring in the immediate view and presence of the court. The order shall state that the person proceeded against is guilty of a contempt and shall be punished as prescribed in Section 78B-6-310.
When the contempt is not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court or judge, an affidavit or statement of the facts by a judicial officer shall be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2009–2016 · leading case: Kimball v. Kimball, 2009 UT App 233 (Utah Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kimball v. Kimball, 2009 UT App 233 (Utah Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-302 amendment notes (2008).”
Iota v. Davco Mgmt. Co., 2016 UT App 231 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-302(2) (LexisNexis 2012).”
Gardiner v. York, 2010 UT App 108 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 8× “"Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42(a) is substantially similar to section 78-32-3 [(now codified as section 78B-6-302)] of the [Utah] Code; both allow summary proceedings for direct contempt.”
Iota, LLC v. Davco Mgmt. Co., 2012 UT App 218 (Utah Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 6× “" The term "judicial officer" is not explicitly defined for purposes of section 78B-6-302. However, as that term is used in other provisions of the Utah Code relating to contempt, it is apparent that it refers to judges and not attorneys.”
A.S. v. State, 310 P.3d 744 (Utah Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “" Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-302(1) (LexisNexis 2012).”
— Utah Code § 78B-6-302(1) — 2 cases
Gardiner v. York, 2010 UT App 108 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). “"Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42(a) is substantially similar to section 78-32-3 [(now codified as section 78B-6-302)] of the [Utah] Code; both allow summary proceedings for direct contempt.”
A.S. v. State, 310 P.3d 744 (Utah Ct. App. 2013). “" Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-302(1) (LexisNexis 2012).”
— Utah Code § 78B-6-302(2) — 4 cases
Iota v. Davco Mgmt. Co., 2016 UT App 231 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-302(2) (LexisNexis 2012).”
Kimball v. Kimball, 2009 UT App 233 (Utah Ct. App. 2009). “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-302 amendment notes (2008).”
Gardiner v. York, 2010 UT App 108 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). “"Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42(a) is substantially similar to section 78-32-3 [(now codified as section 78B-6-302)] of the [Utah] Code; both allow summary proceedings for direct contempt.”
Iota, LLC v. Davco Mgmt. Co., 2012 UT App 218 (Utah Ct. App. 2012). “" The term "judicial officer" is not explicitly defined for purposes of section 78B-6-302. However, as that term is used in other provisions of the Utah Code relating to contempt, it is apparent that it refers to judges and not attorneys.”
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.