Justia Utah Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

After a Robin Doyle and Doug Doyle obtained a litigated custody decree, Robin petitioned the trial court for a modification of the custody of her son, maintaining that there had been a substantial and material change in circumstances when Robin moved from Colorado back to the same neighborhood as her son. The court granted her petition, transferring custody from the child's father, Doug, to Robin. On appeal, the court of appeals affirmed in part and reversed and remanded for recalculation of child support. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court, holding (1) formal bifurcation of the changed circumstances and best interests proceedings was not required by Utah law and the trial court appropriately received evidence regarding changed circumstances and best interest; (2) the trial court correctly found a change in circumstances even when there was no change in the custodial parent's circumstances; and (3) the trial court had ample authority to modify the child support order in the absence of a specific request in Robin's petition for modification of custody. View "Doyle v. Doyle" on Justia Law

Baby E.Z., the child of John Wyatt and the birth mother, who were never married, was born in Virginia. After the birth, the birth mother consented to an adoption, after which Wyatt initiated custody and visitation proceedings in a Virginia court. The prospective parents then filed a petition for adoption in Utah district court. Wyatt filed a motion in the Utah court contesting the adoption and requesting permission to intervene. The Utah court denied Wyatt's motion, holding that he had waived his rights to the child, that he could not intervene, and that his consent to the adoption was not required. Subsequently, the Virginia court issued an order granting Wyatt custody of the baby. On appeal, Wyatt argued that the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA) deprived the Utah district court of jurisdiction over the adoption proceeding and required enforcement of the Virginia court order awarding him custody of the baby. The Supreme Court affirmed the district court's denial of Wyatt's motion, holding (1) the PKPA applied to the adoption proceedings, but that Wyatt waived any claim under the PKPA by failing to raise the statute below; and (2) Wyatt failed to timely assert his parental rights under Utah law. View "In Re Baby E.Z." on Justia Law

Victims-Appellants T.C. and N.C. are the minor victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by their adopted older brother Zachariah Clark. As part of the restitution ordered during sentencing, the trial court required the defendant to pay the costs of the victimsâ therapy. But as defendant was also sentenced to prison, he had no means to pay those costs. Because defendant was adopted through the Utah Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS), Appellants requested that DCFS be ordered to pay their treatment costs pursuant to state law. That request was ultimately denied. On appeal, Appellants raise several grounds for challenging the district courtâs refusal to order DCFS to pay for their treatment. The Supreme Court did not reach the merits of these contentions because it found that the Appellants had no statutory right to appeal the decision.