Copper Hills Custom Homes, LLC v. Countrywide Bank, FSB, 428 P.3d 1133

Copper Hills recorded mechanic's liens for work on eight parcels and filed eight foreclosure actions after alleging nonpayment by Morningside.
The prior consolidated litigation was dismissed, reinstated, and ultimately dismissed again; the court of appeals reinstated the dismissal without prejudice, after which Copper Hills filed the present action more than eight years after lien recording.
Several defendants moved to dismiss, arguing Copper Hills failed to bring suit within the 180-day statutory limitation to enforce mechanic's liens; the district court agreed and declared several liens time-barred and void.
The district court entered five related orders (dismissals and fee awards) and attempted to certify each under Utah R. Civ. P. 54(b) as final and appealable.
The Utah Supreme Court reviewed the 54(b) certifications and found them deficient for multiple procedural reasons, and dismissed the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether appellate jurisdiction exists over orders certified under Rule 54(b)	Copper Hills treated the certified orders as final and appealed.	Defendants argued certifications were improper and appeals untimely or jurisdictionally defective.	Appeal dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction because Rule 54(b) certifications were deficient.
Whether the August 30 stipulation (leaving attorney-fee amount open) was a final appealable judgment	Copper Hills proceeded treating the stipulation as final.	Defendants argued attorney-fee amount unresolved means nonfinal under pre-2016 rule 58A.	Not final under ProMax; certification improper and appeal portion dismissed.
Whether the district court made the required express determination that there is "no just reason for delay"	Copper Hills relied on district court's certifications.	Defendants argued the court failed to make or to explain the required "no just reason" finding.	Certifications deficient: some lacked the express "no just reason" statement; others stated it but failed to provide rationale.
Whether the district court provided adequate Rule 52(a) findings explaining lack of factual overlap (finality rationale)	Copper Hills argued certification was permissible.	Defendants argued court failed to articulate reasons or factual separation between certified and remaining claims.	Insufficient 52(a) findings; appellate court could not meaningfully review 54(b) decisions.

Kennecott Corp. v. Utah State Tax Comm'n, 814 P.2d 1099 (Utah 1991) (adopted a narrow approach to Rule 54(b) finality and cautioned against liberal certification)
Bennion v. Pennzoil Co., 826 P.2d 137 (Utah 1992) (per curiam) (requires Rule 52(a) findings explaining why certified orders are final and why there is no just reason for delay)
Pate v. Marathon Steel Co., 692 P.2d 765 (Utah 1984) (lays out three requirements for Rule 54(b) appealability)
Butler v. Corp. of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 337 P.3d 280 (Utah 2014) (addresses Rule 54(b) requirements and standards)
ProMax Dev. Corp. v. Raile, 998 P.2d 254 (Utah 2000) (holds that an unresolved attorney-fee amount renders a judgment nonfinal pre-2016 Rule 58A amendments)
Stockman's Water Co., LLC v. Vaca Partners, L.P., 425 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 2005) (federal guidance urging clear articulation of reasons for Rule 54(b) certifications)
DFI Props. LLC v. GR 2 Enters. LLC, 242 P.3d 781 (Utah 2010) (reiterates dismissal when appellate court lacks jurisdiction)