Month: January 2021

Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Rules of Professional Conduct – Effective May 1, 2021

Rules of Civil Procedure

URCP083. AMEND. The proposed amendments would bring represented parties into the rule’s purview. They would also permit any court to rely on another court’s vexatious litigant findings and order their own restrictions. Paragraph (e)(1) was updated to fix a grammatical error.  

Rules Governing Constitutional Challenges

The following amendments to Civil Rule 24,Criminal Rule 12, and Appellate Rule 25A  are intended to better coordinate the provisions addressing constitutional challenges. The amendments do the following:

  • Address service on the Attorney General and other governmental entities;
  • Broaden the kinds of challenges that may arise;
  • Clarify that it is the governmental entity that responds, not the county or municipal attorney (which can be a contracted position in certain jurisdictions);
  • Eliminate outdated language in Civil Rule 24 in favor of the updated federal language;
  • Clarify in each rule the process and timing for the Attorney General or other governmental entity to respond to a constitutional challenge; and
  • Eliminate the requirement in Appellate Rule 25A that the Attorney General state the reasons for declining to file an amicus brief.

URCP024 – Redline and URCP024 – Clean

URCrP012 – Redline

URAP025A – Redline

Rules of Professional Conduct

RPC05.04. Professional Independence of a Lawyer. AMEND. Adds a clarifying comment to the rule.

Supreme Court Order for Civil Rules 83 and 24

Supreme Court Order for Criminal Rule 12

Supreme Court Order for Appellate Rule 25A

Supreme Court Order for Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 5.4

Continue Reading
Continue Reading
Continue Reading

Rules of Professional Conduct of the Rules Governing the Utah State Bar – Effective January 19, 2021

RPC06.05.  Short-term Limited Legal Services. AMEND. Broadens the term “short-term legal services” to include one-time consultations and representations through government- and law school-sponsored programs. Further provides that other lawyers in a firm are not disqualified from representing clients whose interests are adverse to a client who received short-term limited legal services from a lawyer in the firm if (1) the lawyer who provided the services is timely screened from the adverse clients’ matters, and (2) receives no fees from those matters.

Supreme Court Order

Continue Reading