Utah Code » Title 78B, Chapter 7 — Protective Orders and Stalking Injunctions; part 78B-7-1 — General Provisions
Utah Code

Utah Code § 78B-7-102 (2026)

Definitions for chapter

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

5/5/2027

As used in this chapter:

"Abuse" means, except as provided in Section 78B-7-201, intentionally or knowingly causing or attempting to cause another individual physical harm or intentionally or knowingly placing another individual in reasonable fear of imminent physical harm.
"Affinity" means the same as that term is defined in Section 76-1-101.5.
"Canadian domestic violence protection order" means the same as that term is defined in Section 78B-7-1201.
"Child" means an individual who is younger than 18 years old.
"Civil protective order" means an order issued, after a hearing on the petition, of which the petitioner and respondent have been given notice, under:
Part 2, Child Protective Orders;
Part 4, Dating Violence Protective Orders;
Part 5, Sexual Violence Protective Orders;
Part 6, Cohabitant Abuse Protective Orders; or
Part 11, Workplace Violence Protective Orders.
"Civil stalking injunction" means a stalking injunction issued under Part 7, Civil Stalking Injunctions.
"Cohabitant" means:
an individual who is emancipated under Section 15-2-1, or an individual who is 16 years old or older, when the individual:
is or was a spouse of the other party;
is or was living as if a spouse of the other party;
is related by blood or marriage to the other party as the individual's parent or grandparent;
is related by consanguinity or affinity to the second degree to the other party;
has or had one or more children in common with the other party;
is the biological parent of the other party's unborn minor child;
resides or has resided in the same residence as the other party; or
is or was in a consensual sexual relationship with the other party; or
an individual who is 18 years old or older and is the sibling, stepsibling, or foster sibling of the other party.
"Cohabitant" does not include:
an individual who is a parent, stepparent, or foster parent of the other party when the other party is a child; or
a child when the other party is:
the child's parent, stepparent, or foster parent; or
younger than 18 years old and is the child's sibling, stepsibling, or foster sibling.
"Consanguinity" means the same as that term is defined in Section 76-1-101.5.
"Constable" means the same as that term is defined in Section 78B-6-801.
"Criminal protective order" means an order issued under Part 8, Criminal Protective Orders.
"Criminal stalking injunction" means a stalking injunction issued under Part 9, Criminal Stalking Injunctions.
"Court clerk" means a district court clerk.
"Dating partner" means an individual who:
is an emancipated individual under Section 15-2-1 or Title 80, Chapter 7, Emancipation; or
is 18 years old or older; and
is, or has been, in a dating relationship with the other party.
"Dating partner" does not include an intimate partner.
"Dating relationship" means a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature, or a relationship which has romance or intimacy as a goal by one or both parties, regardless of whether the relationship involves sexual intimacy.
"Dating relationship" does not include casual fraternization in a business, educational, or social context.
In determining, based on a totality of the circumstances, whether a dating relationship exists:
all relevant factors shall be considered, including:
whether the parties developed interpersonal bonding above a mere casual fraternization;
the length of the parties' relationship;
the nature and the frequency of the parties' interactions, including communications indicating that the parties intended to begin a dating relationship;
the ongoing expectations of the parties, individual or jointly, with respect to the relationship;
whether, by statement or conduct, the parties demonstrated an affirmation of their relationship to others; and
whether other reasons exist that support or detract from a finding that a dating relationship exists; and
it is not necessary that all, or a particular number, of the factors described in Subsection (13)(c)(i) are found to support the existence of a dating relationship.
"Dating violence" means:
a criminal offense involving violence or physical harm, or threat of violence or physical harm, when committed by an individual against a dating partner; or
an attempt, a conspiracy, or a solicitation by an individual to commit a criminal offense involving violence or physical harm against a dating partner of the individual.
"Domestic violence" means the same as that term is defined in Section 77-36-1.
"Ex parte civil protective order" means an order issued without notice to the respondent under:
Part 2, Child Protective Orders;
Part 4, Dating Violence Protective Orders;
Part 5, Sexual Violence Protective Orders;
Part 6, Cohabitant Abuse Protective Orders; or
Part 11, Workplace Violence Protective Orders.
"Ex parte civil stalking injunction" means a stalking injunction issued without notice to the respondent under Part 7, Civil Stalking Injunctions.
"Foreign protection order" means:
the same as that term is defined in Section 78B-7-302; or
a Canadian domestic violence protection order.
"Household animal" means an animal that is tamed and kept as a pet.
"Intimate partner" means the same as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 921.
"Law enforcement unit" or "law enforcement agency" means any public agency having general police power and charged with making arrests in connection with enforcement of the criminal statutes and ordinances of this state or any political subdivision.
"Material statement or material information" means a statement made or information given by a party:
to support an allegation of abuse or domestic violence; and
that could influence a court's decision to issue a protective order, as defined in Section 78B-7-601 or 78B-7-201.
"Minor child" means the same as that term is defined in Section 81-1-101.
"Parent" means the same as that term is defined in Section 81-1-101.
"Peace officer" means an individual described in Title 53, Chapter 13, Peace Officer Classifications.
"Qualifying domestic violence offense" means the same as that term is defined in Section 77-36-1.1.
"Respondent" means the individual against whom enforcement of a protective order is sought.
"Stalking" means the same as that term is defined in Section 76-5-106.5.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2009–2026 · leading case: Card v. Card, 2016 UT App 233 (Utah Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Card v. Card, 2016 UT App 233 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(1) (LexisNexis Supp.”
Martin v. Colonna, 2009 UT App 227 (Utah Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(@)(c). Under the terms of the statute, Martin is not entitled to a protective order relying solely on physical abuse occurring while she was a minor child and not yet satisfying the legal definition of a cohabitant.”
Patole v. Marksberry, 329 P.3d 53 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “" Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(1) - (LexisNexis 2012).”
State v. Watkins, 2011 UT App 96 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “§ 78B-7-102(2) (2008). However, that definition is limited to the provisions of the Cohabitant Abuse Act and is not necessarily applicable in other contexts.”
State v. Graham, 2011 UT App 332 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “2011)); Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(2)(a) (2008) (defining "cohabitant'"' to include a spouse).”
State v. Francis, 2025 UT App 104 (Utah Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “” Utah Code § 78B-7-102(7)(a)(i), (ii), (iv), (v), (vii).”
State v. Ellis, 2014 UT App 185 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “§ 77-86-1 (1) (LexisNexis 2012) ("'Cohabitant' has the same meaning as in Section 78B-7-102 [of the Cohabitant Abuse Act].”
State v. Bridgewaters, 2020 UT 32 (Utah 2020). · cites it 2× “§ 78B-7-102(10)(a) (2017). ¶18 The parties do not dispute that the Violation Statute requires the State to prove Bridgewaters was “properly served” with the orders he is alleged to have violated.”
Patole v. Marksberry, 329 P.3d 50 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 8× “15 The trial court's attempt to limit the definition of cohabitant is perhaps understandable.”
Myers v. Myers, 2010 UT App 74 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). “§ 78B-7-102(2) (2008). This court has previously stated that it sees in this broader definition "no legislative intent to abrogate the case law defining cohabitation in the alimony-termination context.”
Jensen v. Ruflin, 2017 UT App 174 (Utah Ct. App. 2017). “See Utah Code Ann, § 78B-7-102(2)(c) (LexisNexis Supp, 2016) (defining "cohabitant” as "a person who is 16 years of age or older who .”
State v. Harper, 2020 UT App 84 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 78B-7-102(3)(a) (2018). On appeal, Harper does not challenge the level of his stalking conviction.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(1) — 4 cases
Card v. Card, 2016 UT App 233 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). “” Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(1) (LexisNexis Supp.”
Patole v. Marksberry, 329 P.3d 53 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “" Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(1) - (LexisNexis 2012).”
Martin v. Colonna, 2009 UT App 227 (Utah Ct. App. 2009). “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(@)(c). Under the terms of the statute, Martin is not entitled to a protective order relying solely on physical abuse occurring while she was a minor child and not yet satisfying the legal definition of a cohabitant.”
Canteros-Alvarez v. Green, 2026 UT App 95 (Utah Ct. App. 2026).
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(10)(a) — 1 case
State v. Bridgewaters, 2020 UT 32 (Utah 2020). “§ 78B-7-102(10)(a) (2017). ¶18 The parties do not dispute that the Violation Statute requires the State to prove Bridgewaters was “properly served” with the orders he is alleged to have violated.”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(2) — 3 cases
Myers v. Myers, 2010 UT App 74 (Utah Ct. App. 2010). “§ 78B-7-102(2) (2008). This court has previously stated that it sees in this broader definition "no legislative intent to abrogate the case law defining cohabitation in the alimony-termination context.”
State v. Watkins, 2011 UT App 96 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “§ 78B-7-102(2) (2008). However, that definition is limited to the provisions of the Cohabitant Abuse Act and is not necessarily applicable in other contexts.”
Patole v. Marksberry, 329 P.3d 50 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “15 The trial court's attempt to limit the definition of cohabitant is perhaps understandable.”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Graham, 2011 UT App 332 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “2011)); Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(2)(a) (2008) (defining "cohabitant'"' to include a spouse).”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(2)(c) — 4 cases
State v. Watkins, 2011 UT App 96 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “§ 78B-7-102(2) (2008). However, that definition is limited to the provisions of the Cohabitant Abuse Act and is not necessarily applicable in other contexts.”
Martin v. Colonna, 2009 UT App 227 (Utah Ct. App. 2009). “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-7-102(@)(c). Under the terms of the statute, Martin is not entitled to a protective order relying solely on physical abuse occurring while she was a minor child and not yet satisfying the legal definition of a cohabitant.”
Jensen v. Ruflin, 2017 UT App 174 (Utah Ct. App. 2017). “See Utah Code Ann, § 78B-7-102(2)(c) (LexisNexis Supp, 2016) (defining "cohabitant” as "a person who is 16 years of age or older who .”
Patole v. Marksberry, 329 P.3d 50 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “15 The trial court's attempt to limit the definition of cohabitant is perhaps understandable.”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(2)(d) — 1 case
Patole v. Marksberry, 329 P.3d 50 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “15 The trial court's attempt to limit the definition of cohabitant is perhaps understandable.”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(2)(f) — 1 case
State v. Redden, 2022 UT App 14 (Utah Ct. App. 2022).
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(22) — 1 case
Ragsdale v. Fishler, 2025 UT App 36 (Utah Ct. App. 2025).
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(26) — 1 case
Ream v. Ream, 2025 UT App 105 (Utah Ct. App. 2025).
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(3)(a) — 1 case
State v. Harper, 2020 UT App 84 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). “§ 78B-7-102(3)(a) (2018). On appeal, Harper does not challenge the level of his stalking conviction.”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(6) — 1 case
State v. Bridgewaters, 2020 UT 32 (Utah 2020). “§ 78B-7-102(10)(a) (2017). ¶18 The parties do not dispute that the Violation Statute requires the State to prove Bridgewaters was “properly served” with the orders he is alleged to have violated.”
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(7)(a) — 1 case
State v. Taylor, 2026 UT App 53 (Utah Ct. App. 2026).
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(7)(a)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Francis, 2025 UT App 104 (Utah Ct. App. 2025). “” Utah Code § 78B-7-102(7)(a)(i), (ii), (iv), (v), (vii).”
Canteros-Alvarez v. Green, 2026 UT App 95 (Utah Ct. App. 2026).
— Utah Code § 78B-7-102(7)(a)(iii) — 1 case
State v. Francis, 2025 UT App 104 (Utah Ct. App. 2025). “” Utah Code § 78B-7-102(7)(a)(i), (ii), (iv), (v), (vii).”
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.