Code of Judicial Administration – Comment Period Closed June 8, 2023

CJA04-0202.03. Records access (AMEND).

CJA04-0202.05. Request to access an administrative record; research; request to classify an administrative record; request to create an index (AMEND).  The proposed amendments align the rules with Utah Code Sections 77-40a-403(2)(b) and 77-40a-404, identifying individuals and entities who may access expunged records. Other amendments are non-substantive and intended to streamline the rules.

CJA04-0404. Jury selection and service (AMEND). The proposed amendments add the option to email juror qualification forms and summonses to prospective jurors.

CJA06-0501. Reporting requirements for guardians and conservators (AMEND). In response to previous public comments, the proposed amendments clarify filing requirements and use of forms for guardians and conservators.

Utah Courts

View more posts from this author
One thought on “Code of Judicial Administration – Comment Period Closed June 8, 2023
  1. Tracy L. Olson

    The changes to CJA06-0501 are problematic on numerous points. It is not clear what the reasoning is behind these changes, but they will ultimately place additional undue burdens on professional fiduciaries and the wards.

    It proposes to require all internal reports must be filed (5(A)(i)). This is probably the most problematic of the changes. This change does not state what “internal reports” are, but will impose a significant burden, which will expose the wards to disclosure of protected health information, overly detailed financial records, and attorney-client communications. This may require significant redaction. The changes as stated will require significant expense to be incurred by the ward needlessly. This was my previous comments to the previous proposed changes, which I reiterate here:

    With the changes already made to guardianship and conservatorship reporting, I have found that these rules are put in place, but the court approved forms are not been updated. Additionally, there is no reason why a corporate fiduciary “shall” file its internal report or accounting, changing the language from “may.” These internal reports often need to be modified or edited for filing because they are not kept in the same form as the court approved format. Additionally, these “internal reports” often have confidential information that exceeds what is required in the statute and rules and may violate the recent amendments to the guardianship code. See 75-5-301.5 (2) “Except as otherwise provided by this chapter or any other law, an incapacitated person for whom a guardian is appointed has right to:(n) maintain privacy and confidentiality in personal matters.” These internal reports may also include attorney-client privileged communication. It is not clear why the change in the language was needed. Please explain.

    Additionally, these changes removes the ability for the professionals to submit their reports without counsel filing for them (deletion of 5). This will increase costs for cases with fiduciaries that have been filing their own reports. The professionals will now have to go through an attorney to file their reports with the Court; they cannot file them themselves. This will ultimately be taxed to the ward’s estate.

    Also, these changes require the guardian to “file the inventory required of a conservator under Utah Code Section 75-5-312” if there is no conservator, (6(C)), but Utah Code Section 75-5-312 does not require a guardian to file an inventory even when there is no conservator appointed. There is no statutory authority for the rule.

    Further, these changes require a notice of rights to object to an accounting (5(D)), but (11) removes the ability to object to the accountings. This seems contradictory. If the Court is removing the right to object to accountings, then it should delete the requirement in 5(D).