Law Commons^™

Alexis Doutre, Appellant, V. Box Elder County; Brigham City; Union Pacific Railroad Company; And Utah Department Of Transportation, Appellees : Reply Brief, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

On appeal from the Second Judicial District Court, Weber County, Honorable Noel S. Hyde, District Court No. 180906306

Susan Black Dunn, Attorney for Appellee Box Elder County, Matthew D. Church, Attorney for Appellee Brigham City

Troy L. Booher, Beth E. Kennedy, Taylor P. Webb, Attorneys for Appellant Alexis Doutre

Erda Community Association, Inc. Ryan Sorensen; Kalem Sessions; And Denise Moody-Martin. Appellants V. Grantsville City, Appellee. : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

On appeal from the Third Judicial District Court, Tooele County, Honorable Teresa Welch, District Court No. 200301207

Robert Keller, Brett Coombs, Attorneys for Appellee

Janet M. Conway, Attorney for Appellants

Brittany Lee Elder, Appellee V. Matt Blake Elder, Appellant : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

On appeal from the Second Judicial District Court,

Steven Tycksen, Attorneys for Appellee Brittany Lee Elder

Julie J. Nelson, Jaclyn Robertson, Attorneys for Appellant Matt Blake Elder

The Trouble With Time Served, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan

BYU Law Review

Every jurisdiction in the United States gives criminal defendants "credit" against their sentence for the time they spend detained pretrial. In a world of mass incarceration and overcriminalization that disproportionately impacts people of color, this practice appears to be a welcome mechanism for mercy and justice. In fact, how ever, crediting detainees for time served is perverse. It harms the innocent. A defendant who is found not guilty, or whose case is dismissed, gets nothing. Crediting time served also allows the state to avoid internalizing the full costs of pretrial detention, thereby making overinclusive detention standards less expensive. Finally, crediting …

Interested Voting, Matteo Gatti

BYU Law Review

Corporate law is attentive to transactions with a controlling shareholder, but such transactions hardly cover all instances in which an interested shareholder may harm the corporation by casting a pivotal vote to pass a resolution. Interested votes cast by directors, managers, acquirers, cross-holders, arbitrageurs, institutional investors, hedge funds, and several other actors can be as detrimental as votes by a controlling shareholder. Yet, despite the ever growing influence of shareholders in corporate governance, interested voting has received scant attention.

This Article is the first to offer a systematic mapping of interested voting based on type of shareholder and type of …

A Basic Needs Baseline For Distributional Analysis, Ari Glogower

BYU Law Review

Studies of income inequality and the distributive effects of taxes and government spending drive debates over progressive fiscal reform and economic justice. These distributional studies provide vital information on inequality in market outcomes and how government policies mitigate these disparities.

Despite its critical importance, however, distributional analysis encounters inevitable and familiar limitations. These studies face practical challenges in measuring income and the distributional impacts of government policies. Distributional analysis also faces inherent complications in seeking to distinguish between the effects of the market and the government.

Even if distributional analysis could precisely measure income and the effects of government policies, …

Searches Without Suspicion: Avoiding A Four Million Person Underclass, Tonja Jacobi, Addie Maguire

BYU Law Review

In Samson v. California, the Supreme Court upheld warrantless, suspicionless searches for parolees. That determination was controversial both because suspicionless searches are, by definition, anathema to the Fourth Amendment, and because they arguably undermine parolees’ rehabilitation. Less attention has been given to the fact that the implications of the case were not limited to parolees. The opinion in Samson included half a sentence of dicta that seemingly swept probationers into its analysis, implicating the rights of millions of additional people in the United States. Not only is analogizing parolees and probationers not logically sound because the two groups differ in …

The Federalist And The Fourteenth Amendment — Publius In Antebellum Public Debate 1788–1860, Kurt T. Lash

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Unconstitutional Assertion Of Inherent Powers In Multidistrict Litigations, Robert J. Pushaw, Charles Silver

BYU Law Review

This Article examines the constitutional basis of the federal courts’ independent exercise of “inherent powers” (IPs) that Congress has not specifically authorized. Our analysis illuminates the grave constitutional problems raised by the freewheeling assertion of IPs in multidistrict litigations (MDLs), which comprise over half of all pending federal cases.

The Supreme Court has rhetorically acknowledged that the Constitution allows resort to IPs only when doing so is absolutely necessary to enable Article III courts to exercise their “judicial power,” but has then sustained virtually all exercises of IP, whether essential or not. The Court’s excessive deference has emboldened trial judges …

Publius’S Protectors Of Liberty: A Still Important Role For States, Adam Reed Moore

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remand Without Vacatur And The Ab Initio Invalidity Of Unlawful Regulations In Administrative Law, John Harrison

BYU Law Review

An important administrative law doctrine developed by the lower federal courts called remand without vacatur rests on a mistaken premise. Courts that embrace the doctrine maintain that when they find that a federal agency regulation is unlawful, they have discretion to remand the regulation without vacating it. The remand gives the regulatory agency an opportunity to correct the flaws that render the regulation unlawful. When a regulation is remanded but not vacated, the courts assume the regulation binds regulated parties despite its illegality. Unlawful regulations, however, are in general void ab initio, just as unconstitutional statutory rules are void ab …

The Constitutional Model Of Mootness, Tyler B. Lindley

BYU Law Review

Article III limits the federal courts to deciding cases and controversies, and this limitation has given rise to the black-letter law of standing, ripeness, and mootness. But the law of mootness presents a puzzle: Over time, the Court has recognized various "exceptions" to ordinary mootness rules, allowing federal courts to hear arguably moot cases. On one hand, the Court consistently asserts that mootness doctrine, including its exceptions, is compelled by the original understanding of Article III. On the other hand, the scholarly consensus is that these exceptions are logically inconsistent with the Court s claims about Article III and that …

Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, And Restitution In Class Settlements, Jay Tidmarsh, Tladi Marumo

BYU Law Review

This Article uses two recent decisions — one prohibiting incentive awards to class representatives and one permitting disgorgement of side payments to class objectors — to explore deeper connections between class action settlements and the law of restitution. The failure to correctly apply the law of restitution led both courts astray. First, courts can approve incentive awards, as long as an award properly reflects the benefit that the representative's efforts bestowed on the class. Second, restitution provides a basis to disgorge improper side payments to objectors, but only under conditions different from those that the court described. More broadly, attention …

Osha’S Covid-19 Vaccine Mandate: Why Justice Gorsuch’S Analysis Of The Mandate As An Elephant In A Mousehole Misses The Mark, Wyatt Rex Allred

BYU Law Review

Administrative law doctrines such as Chevron seek to strike a balance between adequate delegated power and sufficient checks on such power. The major questions doctrine reinforces the latter. Recent decisions finding major questions, however, have shown a departure from textualist principles, which formed the doctrine s foundation. Justice Gorsuch's opinion in NFIB v. OSHA is an example of this desertion of textualist principles and should thus be viewed as an improper application of the major questions doctrine. Rather than remodeling the major questions doctrine, textualist judges should acknowledge that this form of anti-textual analysis is nothing short of a revival …

Resolving Unfairness In A Fair Way: How The Grantor Trust Rules Should Be Reformed, Aaron T. Anderson

BYU Law Review

Affluent taxpayers often create one or more grantor trusts to achieve significant tax savings. By leveraging mismatches in the rules between the income and estate tax systems, these taxpayers avoid the compressed income tax brackets of trusts while minimizing the property that is included in their estates for estate tax purposes. Some commentators have argued that reform is needed to remove such mismatches. Yet, trusts that rely on the current grantor trust rules abound.

This Note (1) provides a background and history of the rules and use of grantor trusts, (2) argues that harmonizing the estate and income tax systems …

State Of Utah Plaintiff - Petitioner, V. Alfonso Valdez, Defendant - Respondent : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

On Writ of Certiorari to the Utah Court of Appeals

EMILY ADAMS, FREYJA JOHNSON, Counsel for Respondent

CHRISTOPHER A. BATES, SEAN D. REYES, MELISSA A. HOLYOAK, ANDREW F. PETERSON, Counsel for Petitioner

State Of Utah, Plaintiff /Respondent Vs. Elbert John Pule, Defendant /Petitioner : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

Reply Brief of Petitioner on Writ of Certiorari

DAVID SIMPSON, SEAN REYES, Counsel for Respondent

DOUGLAS J. THOMPSON, JENNIFER FORESTA, Counsel for Petitioner

State Of Utah, Plaintiff /Respondent Vs. Elbert John Pule, Defendant /Petitioner : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

Reply Brief of Petitioner on Writ of Certiorari

DAVID SIMPSON, SEAN REYES, Counsel for Respondent

DOUGLAS J. THOMPSON, JENNIFER FORESTA, Counsel for Petitioner

D.W.. L.T., J.G.. Plaintiffs/ Appellees. V. Fpa Sandy Mall Associates, A Utah Limited Liability Corporation, Defendant/ Appellant : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

On petition for permission to appeal an interlocutory order from the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County Before the Honorable Randall Skanchy Civil Case No. 220902143

MICHAEL W. YOUNG, ANDRES MORELLI, Attorneys for Plaintiffs /Appellees

VINCENT J. VELARDO, Attorneys for Defendant FPA Sandy Mall Associates, Defendant/Appellant

Washington Townhomes, Llc; Homes By Harmony, Inc.; Cotton Meadows, Llc; Salisburty Development Llc; Southern Utah Home Builders Assn.; Ivory Southern, Llc; Perry Homes Utah; Henry Walker Construction Of Southern Utah, Llc, Plaintiffs /Appellees, V. Washington County Water Conservancy District, Defendant /Appellant : Reply Brief, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

On appeal from the Fifth Judicial Court, Salt Lake County, State of Utah

Benson L. Hathaway, Jr., Justin W. Starr, Adam D. Wahlquist, Thomas K. Checketts, Craig M. Call, Attorneys for Appellees

Robert C. Keller, Scott P. Powers, Melinda K. Bowen, Nathanael J. Mitchell, Attorneys for Appellant

State Of Utah, Plaintiff/ Respondent, V. William Torres-Orellana, Defendant /Petitioner : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

On Writ of Certiorari from the opinion of the Utah Court of Appeals, State v. Torres-Orellana, 2021 UT App 75 (issued July 9, 2021)

David A. Simpson, Sean Reyes, Counsel for Respondent

Emily Adams, Freyja Johnson, Cherise Bacalski, Counsel for Petitioner

Norm C. Mayhew, Petitioner / Appellant V. Utah Labor Commission, Darrell W. Anderson Construction, Inc, And/Or Workers Compensation Fund, Respondents / Appellees : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

Appeal from the Labor Commission of Utah

Michele L. Halstenrud, Hans M. Scheffler, Attorneys for Respondents/ Appellees Darrell W. Anderson Construction, Inc. and Worker's Compensation Fund, Christopher C. Hill, Attorney for Respondent / Appellee Utah Labor Commission

Michael Gary Belnap, Virginius Dabney, Stony V. Olsen, Attorneys for Petitioner/Appellant Norm C. Mayhew

Norm C. Mayhew, Petitioner / Appellant V. Utah Labor Commission, Darrell W. Anderson Construction, Inc, And/Or Workers Compensation Fund, Respondents / Appellees : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

Appeal from the Labor Commission of Utah

Michele L. Halstenrud, Hans M. Scheffler, Attorneys for Respondents/ Appellees Darrell W. Anderson Construction, Inc. and Worker's Compensation Fund, Christopher C. Hill, Attorney for Respondent / Appellee Utah Labor Commission

Michael Gary Belnap, Virginius Dabney, Stony V. Olsen, Attorneys for Petitioner/Appellant Norm C. Mayhew

C. Leon Nelson And Marilynn Tetrick, Defendants/ Appellants, V. Karen Goldberg, Marc Goldberg, Thomas Goldberg Elaina Friedman, And Martin Krone, Plaintiffs /Appellees : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

Cameron L. Sabin, Joshua Cutler, Counsel for appellees

Cameron L. Sabin, Joshua Cutler, Counsel for appellees

Ryan B. Hancey, Adam L. Grundvig, J. Adam Knorr, Counsel for appellants

State Of Utah, Plaintiff /Appellee, V. Phillip Mason King, Defendant /Appellant : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

On appeal from the Second Judicial District Court, Weber County, Honorable Michael DiReda, District Court No. 191900996

Sean Reyes, Counsel for Appellee

Freyja Johnson, Hannah Leavitt-Howell, Counsel for Appellant

The Local Pages Of Nevada, Llc, Plaintiff/Appellant V. Plumb Line Mechanical, Inc., Defendant/Appellee : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

Appeal from the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, State of Utah Honorable Laura Scott, District Court Judge

Jordan K. Cameron, David B. Nielson, Attorneys for Appellee Plumb Line Mechanical Inc.

D. Scott Crook, Attorneys for Appellant The Local Pages of Nevada LLC

440 North Sf, Llc, Plaintiff And Appellant, V. Vista Heights Investments, Llc,, And Sii Megadiamond, Inc., Defendants And Appellees : , Vista Heights Investments, _ | 70220785-Ca Llc, A Utah Limited Liability Company : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

ON APPEAL FROM THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FOR UTAH COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH Trial Court Case No. 210400480 Honorable Robert Lund

Spencer Macdonald, Attorney for Appellant

Barney Madsen, Steve Lundwall, James K. Tracy, Joshua Lee, Attorney for Appellees

C. Leon Nelson And Marilynn Tetrick, Defendants/Appellants, V. Karen Goldberg, Marc Goldberg, Thomas Goldberg Elaina Friedman, And Martin Krone, Plaintiffs/Appellees : Reply Brief, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

Interlocutory Appeal from the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Honorable Richard D. McKelvie

Cameron L. Sabin, Joshua Cutler, Counsel for appellees

Ryan B. Hancey, Adam L. Grundvig, J. Adam Knorr, Counsel for appellants

440 North Sf, Llc, Plaintiff And Appellant, V. Vista Heights Investments, Llc,, And Sii Megadiamond, Inc., Defendants And Appellees : Brief Of Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2020 –)

ON APPEAL FROM THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FOR UTAH COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH Trial Court Case No. 210400480 Honorable Robert Lund

Spencer Macdonald, Attorney for Appellant

Barney Madsen, Steve Lundwall, James K. Tracy, Joshua Lee, Attorney for Appellees

Tiffany Bingham, Appellant V. George C> Gourley, Appellee : Brief Of Appellee, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2021– )

On Appeal from the Fourth Judicial District Court, Utah County Case No. 200401253, Judges ee McDade and Sean Petersen

Christiansen Law, PLLC Stephen K. Christiansen Kathleen M. Liuzzi M. Kelton Gardner Counsel for Appellant Tiffany Bingham

Benjamin K. Lusty (12159) Cami R. Schiel (16941) Brian P. Miller Andrew L. Roth Counsel for Appellee George C. Gourley Kirk G. Gibbs (5955) Devin H. Geier (18935) Counsel for Appellee McKay L. Platt, M.D.