Procedure and Evidence Archives

State In Interest of B.W. – 2022 UT App 131

State In Interest of B.W. – 2022 UT App 131 Court of Appeals of Utah. STATE of Utah, IN the INTEREST OF B.W., J.W., and N.W., persons under eighteen years of age. H.W., Appellant, v. State of Utah, Appellee. No.…

Mower v. Mower – 2023 UT App 10 – Death of Spouse Before Court Rules

2023 UT App 10 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS LIDIA V. MOWER, Appellant, v. THOMAS W. MOWER, Appellee. Opinion No. 20210101-CA Filed January 20, 2023 Fourth District Court, American Fork Department The Honorable Roger W. Griffin No. 124100133 Cassie J.…

In Re K.K. – 2023 UT App 14 – Abuse and Neglect Adjudication

March 15, 2023

Divorce Utah

Abuse, Appeal, Child Abuse, Child Custody, Child Neglect, Court Orders, Custody, Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS), Emotional abuse, Evidence, Family Law, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Guardianship, Juvenile Court, Physical Custody, Procedure and Evidence, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law

(b), § 80-1-102(92), ¶ 14, ¶ 27, ¶ 9, 2011 UT 71, 2017 UT 44, 2018 UT App 141, 2020 UT App 114, 2021 UT 36, 2022 UT 39, 424 P.3d 91, 496 P.3d 58, abuse, abuse adjudication, against the clear weight of the evidence, and (B), appeal, both neglected and abused, clear and convincing evidence harmed or threatened harm, clearly erroneous, conclusions of law, defined, domestic violence in the presence of a children, error, Essential Botanical Farms, facts, findings of fact, In re A.B., In re C.M.R., in re E.R., In re K.T., In re N.M., juvenile court, LC v. Kay, mixed questions of law and fact, neglect adjudication, prejudiced, speculate, Utah Code § 80-1-102(1)(a)(i)(A), Utah Code § 80-1-102(37)(a), Utah Code § 80-3-402, Utah Code § 80-3-402(1), Utah Court of Appeals, very highly probable

In re K.K. – 2023 UT App 14 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, IN THE INTEREST OF K.K., S.K., AND S.K., PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. B.K., Appellant, v. STATE OF UTAH, Appellee. Opinion No. 20220051-CA…

In re K.K. – 2023 UT App 13

March 14, 2023

Divorce Utah

Abuse, Child Abuse, Child Custody, Child Neglect, Court Orders, Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS), Emotional abuse, Evidence, Family Law, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Guardianship, Juvenile Court, Physical Custody, Procedure and Evidence, Uncategorized, Utah Law

(b), § 80-1-102(92), ¶ 14, ¶ 27, ¶ 9, 2011 UT 71, 2017 UT 44, 2018 UT App 141, 2020 UT App 114, 2021 UT 36, 2022 UT 39, 424 P.3d 91, 496 P.3d 58, abuse, abuse adjudication, against the clear weight of the evidence, and (B), appeal, both neglected and abused, clear and convincing evidence harmed or threatened harm, clearly erroneous, conclusions of law, defined, domestic violence in the presence of a children, error, Essential Botanical Farms, facts, findings of fact, In re A.B., In re C.M.R., in re E.R., In re K.T., In re N.M., juvenile court, LC v. Kay, mixed questions of law and fact, neglect adjudication, prejudiced, speculate, Utah Code § 80-1-102(1)(a)(i)(A), Utah Code § 80-1-102(37)(a), Utah Code § 80-3-402, Utah Code § 80-3-402(1), Utah Court of Appeals, very highly probable

In re K.K. – 2023 UT App 13 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, IN THE INTEREST OF K.K., S.K., AND S.K., PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. D.K., Appellant, v. STATE OF UTAH, Appellee. Opinion No. 20220050-CA…

Mintz v. Mintz – 2023 UT App 17

March 10, 2023

Divorce Utah

Alimony and Support, Appeal, Assets/Debt/Property, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Division of Marital Property, Divorce, Divorce Court, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Fault, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Husband's or Wife's Business, Infidelity, Marital Estate, Marital Property, Men's Divorce Issues, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Procedure and Evidence, Property Division, Spouse's Business, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law, Women's Divorce Issues

¶ 11, ¶ 14, ¶ 15, ¶ 16, ¶ 2, ¶ 21, ¶ 46, ¶ 48, ¶ 5, ¶ 53, ¶ 57 n.8, ¶ 58 n.8, ¶ 8, 1166 (Utah Ct. App. 1997), 1170 (Utah Ct. App. 1990), 1211 (Utah Ct. App. 1991), 127 P.3d 1224, 131 P.3d 872, 141 P.3d 618, 145 A.3d 709, 1999 UT 86, 200 P.3d 223, 2001 UT App 157, 2003 UT App 357, 2005 UT App 518, 2006 UT App 301, 2006 UT App 75, 2009 UT App 10, 2009 UT App 233, 2011 UT App 41, 2012 UT App 373, 2014 UT App 26, 2017 UT App 133, 2017 UT App 137, 2019 UT 16, 2019 UT 61, 2019 UT App 114, 2020 UT App 141, 2021 UT App 77, 2022 UT App 47, 217 P.3d 733, 223 (Utah 1976); see also Allen Distrib., 232 (N.C. Ct. App. 2000), 248 P.3d 65, 294 P.3d 591, 321 P.3d 200, 402 P.3d 153, 402 P.3d 34, 445 P.3d 395, 449 P.3d 202, 452 P.3d 1134, 476 P.3d 145, 496 P.3d 242, 509 P.3d 265, 509 P.3d 265; Miner v. Miner, 534 S.E.2d 230, 536 (Iowa Ct. App. 2018), 554 P.2d 220, 604 P.2d 938, 689 (Utah 1939), 716 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2016), 739 P.2d 83, 799 P.2d 1166, 80 P.3d 153, 806 P.2d 1209, 84 (Utah Ct. App. 1987), 87 P.2d 686, 908 N.W.2d 524, 934 P.2d 1164, 940 (Utah 1979), 993 P.2d 191, abuse of discretion, affirm, alimony, appeal, B.L. Key, Bakanowski v. Bakanowski, Bjarnson v. Bjarnson, book of business, Brady v. Park, Bryant v. Bryant, Burt v. Burt, Cheves v. Williams, circumstances, comforts, Cowley v. Porter, customary, dissipation of marital estate, divorce, Dobson v. Dobson, Eberhard v. Eberhard, employer asset, essential, Gardner v. Gardner, Holt v. Industrial Comm’n, Howell v. Howell, In re Marriage of Stenzel, Inc. v. Industrial Comm’n, Inc. v. Utah State Tax Comm’n, infidelity, investment accounts, Kemp v. Kemp, Kidd v. Kidd, Kimball v. Kimball, Knowles v. Knowles, Leppert v. Leppert, Lombardi v. Lombardi, luxuries, maintaining, minimum, Mintz v. Mintz - 2023 UT App 17, Mitchell v. Mitchell, n.1, National Advert. Co. v. Murray City Corp., necessities, Ortiz v. Crowther, proper status, property distribution, remand, reverse, Rule v. Rule, standard of living, Talley v. Talley, Utah law, Valentine v. Farmers Ins. Exch., Youth Tennis Found. v. Tax Comm’n

Mintz v. Mintz – 2023 UT App 17 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS RAYNA ELIZABETH MINTZ, Appellant and Cross-appellee, v. GLEN RYAN MINTZ, Appellee and Cross-appellant. Opinion No. 20200507-CA Filed February 9, 2023 Third District Court, Silver Summit Department The…

In Re J.E. – 2023 UT App 3 – Challenge to Voluntary Declaration of Paternity

March 9, 2023

Divorce Utah

Appeal, Court Orders, Court Rules, Family Law, Juvenile Court, Parental Rights, Procedure and Evidence, Termination of Parental Rights, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law

voluntary declaration of paternity

In re J.E. – 2023 UT App 3 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, IN THE INTEREST OF J.E., A PERSON UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. D.E., Appellant, v. STATE OF UTAH, Appellee. Opinion No. 20210921-CA Filed January…

Myers v. Myers 2023 UT App 20 – Alimony Modification

March 8, 2023

Divorce Utah

Alimony and Support, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Dirty Tricks, Divorce, Divorce Costs, Divorce Court, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Evidence, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Finances, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Husband's or Wife's Business, Judges, Legal System, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Alimony, Modification of Decree of Divorce, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Procedure and Evidence, Termination of Alimony, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law, Women's Divorce Issues

¶ 11, ¶ 14, ¶ 19, ¶ 27, ¶ 28, ¶ 30, ¶ 31, ¶ 42, ¶ 6, ¶ 7, ¶ 8, ¶ 9, ¶¶ 14–15, 1075 (Utah 1985), 1999 UT App 12, 1999 UT App 219, 1999 UT App 41, 2003 UT App 357, 2004 PA Super 37, 2014 UT App 204, 2014 UT App 211, 2017 UT App 150, 2017 UT App 155, 2018 UT App 175, 2018 UT App 189, 2018 UT App 22, 2018 UT App 75, 2019 UT App 207, 2021 UT App 77, 2022 UT App 36, 2022 UT App 88, 2023 UT App 20, 334 P.3d 994, 335 P.3d 378, 402 P.3d 219, 405 P.3d 749, 412 (Utah 1977), 414 P.3d 1023, 424 P.3d 1113, 436 P.3d 294, 437 P.3d 411, 456 P.3d 1159, 496 P.3d 242, 508 P.3d 612, 515 P.3d 481, 565 P.2d 409, 566 (Utah 1985), 700 P.2d 1072, 704 P.2d 564, 80 P.3d 153, 843 A.2d 1247, 973 P.2d 431, 974 P.2d 306, 983 P.2d 1103, ability to pay, alimony, Armendariz v. Armendariz, Barrani v. Barrani, Bukunowski v. Bukunowski, Degao Xu v. Hongguang Zhao, demonstrated need, earning capacity, English v. English, Fox v. Fox, Gerwe v. Gerwe, Jones v. Jones, maximum permissible alimony award, Miner v. Miner, modification of alimony, modifying alimony, Moon v. Moon, Myers v. Myers, need, Nicholson v. Nicholson, Olson v. Olson, Pankhurst v. Pankhurst, Paulsen v. Paulsen, PEEPLES v. PEEPLES, Rehn v. Rehn, Roberts v. Roberts, substantial material change in circumstances, Utah Code § 30-3-5, Utah Court of Appeals, Vanderzon v. Vanderzon, voluntary unemployment, Williamson v. Williamson, Woskob v. Woskob

Myers v. Myers 2023 UT App 20 2023 UT App 20 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS AMY R. MYERS, Appellee, v. JACOB W. MYERS, Appellant. Opinion No. 20220002-CA Filed March 2, 2023 Sixth District Court, Richfield Department The Honorable Brody…

Wellman v. Kawasaki – 2023 UT App 11 – Alimony

March 3, 2023

Divorce Utah

Alimony and Support, Appeal, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Divorce, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Evidence, Family Law, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Judges, Men's Divorce Issues, Procedure and Evidence, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Court Rules, Utah Law, Women's Divorce Issues

¶ 14, 2014 UT App 211, 2015 UT 79, 2021 UT App 77, 335 P.3d 378, 459 P.3d 276, 496 P.3d 242, 700 P.2d 1072 (Utah 1985), Dahl v. Dahl, equalize the standards of living of each party, financial declaration, Jones v. Jones, Miner v. Miner, need must constitute the maximum permissible alimony award, prevent recipient spouse from becoming a public charge, purposes of alimony, Roberts v. Roberts, standard of living that existed during the marriage, statutory alimony factors, supporting] financial documentation, Utah Code § 30-3-5(10), Utah law, Utah R. Civ. P. 26.1(c).

2023 UT App 11 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS DAVID WELLMAN, Appellee, v. KRISTIN KAWASAKI, Appellant. Opinion No. 20210265-CA Filed February 2, 2023 Fourth District Court, Provo Department The Honorable Christine S. Johnson No. 174402919 Mary Deiss Brown, Attorney for…

In Re A.H. – 2022 UT App 114 – Termination of Parental Rights

March 2, 2023

Divorce Utah

Adoption, Appeal, Best Interest of the Child, Child Abuse, Child Custody, Child Neglect, Child Protective Services, Child Support, Court Orders, Custody, Evidence, Family Law, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Grandparent rights, Guardianship, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Judges, Juvenile Court, Mental Illness, Parental Fitness, Parental Rights, Physical Custody, Procedure and Evidence, Substance Abuse, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law

2021 UT 19, 455 U.S. 745, 530 U.S. 57, 648 P.2d 1364, abandonment, abuse, adoption, appeals, best interest, clear and convincing evidence standard, deference, federal and state constitutions Troxel v. Granville, foster parents, fundamental rights, guardianship, In re G.D., In re J.P., juvenile court, lower court findings, most important rights, neglect, parental rights, permanent guardianship, present-tense fashion, relatives, reverse, right of parents to raise their children, Santosky v. Kramer, stipulation, strictly necessary, termination, two-part test, United States Constitution, Utah Code § 80-4-104(1)

2022 UT App 114 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, IN THE INTEREST OF A.H., J.H., J.H., L.H., N.H., S.H., AND E.H., PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. N.J.H. AND S.H., Appellants, v. STATE OF UTAH, Appellee. Opinion…

Fox v. Fox 2022 UT App 88 – alimony

Fox v. Fox 2022 UT App 88 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS DIANN SHERI FOX, Appellant, v. BENJAMIN DAVIS FOX, Appellee. Opinion No. 20200949-CA Filed July 14, 2022 Fifth District Court, St. George Department The Honorable Matthew L. Bell No.…

Twitchell v. Twitchell – 2022 UT App 49 – child custody and support

April 18, 2022

Divorce Utah

Appeal, Best Interest of the Child, Child Custody, Child Support, Child Support Calculation, Children in Divorce, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Court Rules, Custody, Dirty Tricks, Divorce, Divorce Court, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Domestic Violence, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Judges, Legal System, Men's Divorce Issues, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Parent Time, Parental Fitness, Parenting Plan, Physical Custody, Preparing for Divorce, Procedure and Evidence, Sole Custody, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Court Rules, Utah Law, Visitation, Women's Divorce Issues

appeal, calculation, child custody, Child Support, child support obligation, conclusions of law, deviate, district court, divorce decree, Domestic Violence, evidence, findings of fact, income, moral character, neglect, Parent Time, physical abuse, physical custody, statutory minimum schedule, trial court, Utah Code § 30-3-10, Utah Code § 30-3-34, Utah Code § 30-3-35, Utah Code § 30-3-35.5, Utah Code § 78B-12-203, Utah Court of Appeals

Twitchell v. Twitchell – 2022 UT App 49 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS JAZMIN S. TWITCHELL, Appellee, V. JOSEPH N. TWITCHELL, Appellant. Opinion No. 20200546-CA Filed April 14, 2022 First District Court, Logan Department The Honorable Brian G. Cannell No.…

Widdison v. Widdison – 2022 UT App 46 – custody modification

April 13, 2022

Divorce Utah

Appeal, Best Interest of the Child, Child Custody, Child Custody Modification, Children in Divorce, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Court Rules, Custody, Dirty Tricks, Divorce, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Domestic Relations Commissioners, Evidence, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Joint Legal Custody, Joint Physical Custody, Judges, Justice and Equity, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Child Custody, Modification of Child Support, Modification of Decree of Divorce, Modification of Parent-time, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Motion Practice, Noncustodial parents, Parental Rights, Petition to Modify Decree of Divorce, Physical Custody, Procedure and Evidence, Sole Custody, Special Circumstances, Unwed Parents, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Court Rules, Utah Law, Women's Divorce Issues

best interest, best interests, discretion, Modification, Parent Time, physical custody, Relocation, stability, substantial and material change in circumstances, Utah Code § 30-3-10.1, Utah Code § 30-3-10.4, Utah Code § 30-3-34, Utah Code § 30-3-37, Utah Code §30-3-36

Widdison v. Widdison – 2022 UT App 46 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS NICOLE WIDDISON, Appellant, LEON BRYANT WIDDISON, Appellee. Opinion No. 20200484-CA Filed April 7, 2022 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Robert P. Faust No.…

In re Adoption of E.M.F. – 2022 UT App 43 time in which to appeal

In re Adoption of E.M.F… – 2022 UT App 43 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF E.M.F. AND M.S.F., PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. S.S. AND B.S., Appellants, v. J.F., Appellee. Opinion No.…

Erickson v. Erickson – 2022 UT App 27

THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS DEAN ERICKSON, Appellee, v. JANICE ERICKSON, Appellant. Opinion No. 20200193-CA Filed March 3, 2022 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Todd M. Shaughnessy No. 174901105 Albert N. Pranno, Attorney for Appellant Jordan M.…

Hinds v Hinds-Holm – 2022 UT App 13 – child custody award factors

Hinds v Hinds-Holm – 2022 UT App 13 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS BRADLEY HINDS, Appellee, v. RACHEL HINDS-HOLM, Appellant. Opinion No. 20200586-CA Filed January 27, 2022 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable James T. Blanch No. 174905091…

Wadsworth v. Wadsworth – 2022 UT App 5 – marital estate

January 17, 2022

Divorce Utah

Alimony and Support, Appeal, Assets/Debt/Property, Attorney Fees, Business Interests, Business Valuation, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Court Rules, Division of Marital Property, Divorce, Divorce and Taxes, Divorce Attorneys, Divorce Causes, Divorce Costs, Divorce Court, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Lawyers, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Equity, Evidence, Expert Witnesses, Extramarital affairs/Adultery, Family Law, Finances, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Husband's or Wife's Business, Infidelity, Judges, Justice and Equity, Lawyer Fees, Legal System, Marital Debts, Marital Estate, Marital Home, Marital Property, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Alimony, Modification of Decree of Divorce, Personal Property, Procedure and Evidence, Property Division, Real Estate/Real Property, Spousal Support, Spouse's Business, Taxation, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law, Valuation, Women's Divorce Issues

appellate case, appellate decision, court of appeals, divorce law, family law, Utah Court of Appeals

2022 UT App 5 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS CANDI WADSWORTH, Appellant, v. GUY L. WADSWORTH, Appellee. Opinion No. 20190106-CA No. 20200430-CA Filed January 13, 2022 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Su Chon No. 104904966 Michael D.…

Fischer v. Fischer – 2021 UT App 145 – marital vs. separate property

THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS GARY LEE FISCHER, Appellant, v. MELISSA KAY FISCHER, Appellee. Opinion No. 20200557-CA Filed December 30, 2021 Seventh District Court, Moab Department The Honorable Don Torgerson No. 184700047 Steve S. Christensen and Clinton R. Brimhall, Attorneys…

I suspect my husband fathered a child with someone else. Can I challenge our divorce ruling?

If I suspect my ex-husband fathered a child with someone else while we were married, can I challenge our divorce ruling? If, by this question, you mean that you are the wife; and you discovered, after you divorced, that your…

Why is it difficult for a father to get child custody?

February 13, 2021

Divorce Utah

Best Interest of the Child, Child Custody, Child Custody Modification, Children in Divorce, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Custody, Custody Evaluation, Dirty Tricks, Divorce, Divorce Attorneys, Divorce Court, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Lawyers, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Holiday Parent-time, Joint Legal Custody, Joint Physical Custody, Judges, Justice and Equity, Legal Custody, Legal System, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Child Custody, Modification of Decree of Divorce, Modification of Parent-time, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Noncustodial parents, Parent Time, Parentage, Parental Alienation, Parental Fitness, Parental Rights, Parenting Plan, Paternity, Petition to Modify Decree of Divorce, Physical Custody, Preparing for Divorce, Procedure and Evidence, Sole Custody, Uncategorized, Women's Divorce Issues

bias, care, child custody, children, courts, difficult, false belief, false premises, father, fathers, holidays, joint equal child custody, mothers, mothers better parents, overcome, pernicious, presuming, presumption, primary custody, relationship, society, sole, weekend

Why is it difficult for a father to get child custody? Because there is a pernicious and false belief in far too many of the courts (not, notably, in society at large) that generally: mothers are better parents than fathers;…

If I can’t find an attorney, can it honestly be said I got a fair trial?

If I can’t find an attorney, can it honestly be said I got a fair trial? If a person seeks legal representation in a court, and every attorney they tries to hire refuses to represent them, can he receive a…