Utah Court Rules – Published for Comment

The Supreme Court and Judicial Council invite comments about amending these rules. To view the proposed amendment, click on the rule number.

To submit a comment or view the comments of others, click on “Continue Reading.” To submit a comment, scroll down to the “Leave a Reply” section, and type your comment in the “Comment” field. Type your name and email address in the designated fields and click “Post Comment.”

Comments cannot be acknowledged, but all will be considered. Comments are saved to a buffer for review before publication.

Posted: January 29, 2016

Rules of Civil Procedure

URCP 013. Counterclaim and cross-claim. Amend. Deletes paragraphs (e), (i) and (j). Amending a pleading to add a counterclaim, regardless of the reason it was omitted, is properly governed by Rule 15. Adopts many of the grammar and style amendments of the federal rule.
URCP015. Amended and supplemental pleadings. Amend. Adopts the federal rule governing relation-back of an amended pleading when the amended pleading adds a new party. See Wright v. P.K. Transport, 2014 UT App 93. ¶¶ 18-22, Voros concurring. Requires that the proposed amended pleading be attached to the motion for permission to file an amended pleading. Adopts many of the grammar and style amendments of the federal rule.
URCP 026.03. Disclosure in unlawful detainer actions. New. Regulates disclosures in an action for eviction or damages arising out an unlawful detainer by a residential tenant.

This entry was posted in -Rules of Civil Procedure, URCP013, URCP015, URCP026.03.

Utah Courts

View more posts from this author

One thought on “Rules of Civil Procedure”

Axel Trumbo

January 29, 2016 at 4:00 pm

Rule 26.3. I would amend the scope. There are only certain circumstances in which Mobile Home Park cases follow the expedited procedures of the unlawful detainer statutes. See Utah Code Ann. sec. 57-16-15(1) and (2). And its only under section 810 of the unlawful detainer statutes that an immediate occupancy hearing is provided for. So we don’t need to include a reference to the Mobile Home Park Residency Act because an immediate occupancy hearing will occur only if the party elected to sue under the unlawful detainer statutes.
Also, the immediate occupancy hearings and the requirement to have trial within 60 days applies only when the tenant remains on the property. See Utah Code Ann. sec. 78B-6-810(1) (“In an action under this chapter in which the tenant remains in possession of the property . . .”). There can be cases in which an unlawful detainer action is filed, but the tenant isn’t in the property anymore. I would add to the scope of rule 26.3 that the rule applies to cases brought under the unlawful detainer statutes in cases “in which the tenant remains in possession of the property.” Using the same language of section 810 will create consistency.