{"id":2827,"date":"2022-03-16T11:41:34","date_gmt":"2022-03-16T18:41:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/?p=2827"},"modified":"2022-05-01T09:26:21","modified_gmt":"2022-05-01T16:26:21","slug":"rules-of-civil-procedure-comment-period-closes-april-30-2022","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/2022\/03\/16\/rules-of-civil-procedure-comment-period-closes-april-30-2022\/","title":{"rendered":"Rules of Civil Procedure &#8211; Comment Period Closed April 30, 2022"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/31\/2022\/03\/URCP-4-rule-draft-11.17.2021.pdf\">URCP004.<\/a> <strong>Process.<\/strong> AMEND. Based upon the regular practice with default judgments the Committee is proposing a change of the word \u201cwill\u201d to \u201cmay\u201d in subsection (c)(1)(E).\u00a0\u00a0The rule would then read that a \u201cjudgment by default\u00a0<u>may<\/u>\u00a0be entered against the defendant.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/31\/2022\/03\/URCP-41-rule-draft-02.16.2022.pdf\">URCP041.<\/a>\u00a0 <strong>Dismissal of actions.<\/strong> AMEND. The issue of dismissing an action as to a particular party was brought to the Committee.\u00a0\u00a0The example posed included a multi-defendant case where a settlement agreement may have been reached as to some, but not all defendants, and the plaintiff sought to dismiss the action as to those particular defendants, but not all of the defendants.\u00a0\u00a0Rule 41 currently addresses the dismissal of an \u201caction.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0The Committee is proposing a change to subsections (a)(1)(A) and (a)(2) that would permit a plaintiff to dismiss an action \u201cor any party or portion thereof.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/31\/2022\/03\/Rule-42-Judge-Holmberg-01.20.2022.pdf\">URCP042.<\/a> <strong>Consolidation; separate trials; venue transfer.<\/strong> AMEND. A\u00a0change is being proposed to (a)(3) from the word \u201cnew\u201d to \u201csingle,\u201d because procedurally clerks do not issue a new case number to cases that have been consolidated, rather the case is moved under one case number already in existence.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/31\/2022\/03\/Rule-43-Loni-Page-01-20.2022.pdf\">URCP043.<\/a> <strong>Evidence.<\/strong> AMEND. Changes to the language of the remote hearing oath outlined in subsection (c) to remove the language \u201cissue (or matter) pending between ___ and ___\u201d to be replaced by the word \u201cmatter.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0Particularly for cases in juvenile court where the caption is \u201cState of Utah in the interest of \u2026\u201d the language in the oath is more encompassing if read \u201cevidence you shall give in this\u00a0<u>matter<\/u>\u201d when administering the oath.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>URCP004. Process. AMEND. Based upon the regular practice with default judgments the Committee is proposing a change of the word \u201cwill\u201d to \u201cmay\u201d in subsection (c)(1)(E).\u00a0\u00a0The rule would then read that a \u201cjudgment by default\u00a0may\u00a0be entered against the defendant.\u201d URCP041.\u00a0 Dismissal of actions. AMEND. The issue of dismissing an action as to a particular party [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[627,195,278,956,560],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2827","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rules-of-civil-procedure","category-urcp004","category-urcp041","category-urcp042","category-urcp043"],"publishpress_future_action":{"enabled":false,"date":"2026-04-18 01:18:37","action":"change-status","newStatus":"draft","terms":[],"taxonomy":"category","extraData":[]},"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2827","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2827"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2827\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2873,"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2827\/revisions\/2873"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2827"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2827"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legacy.utcourts.gov\/utc\/rules-comment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2827"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}