Johnson v. Office of Professional Conduct
2017 UT 7
| Utah | 2017Background
- OPC filed a formal attorney-discipline complaint against Stacey Austin Johnson; after a two-day bench trial the district court found violations and held a sanctions hearing.
- The district court signed and filed its "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order of Suspension" on June 15, 2015.
- Under the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure in effect then, a judgment is "deemed entered" when signed by the judge and filed with the clerk.
- Johnson did not appeal within 30 days; instead he filed two motions in district court on August 10, 2015 (stay pending review; motion to dismiss or reinstate appeal time), both later denied.
- Johnson filed a petition for review in the Utah Supreme Court on November 12, 2015, 150 days after entry of the district court order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court Order was final for appeal purposes | Johnson: Order not final on June 15 because suspension’s effective date was later and amended rules should apply | OPC: Order was final when signed and filed June 15 under pre-amendment rules; appeal time runs from entry date | Court: Order was final on June 15 under then-applicable Rules 54 and 58A; appeal time ran from entry |
| Whether Johnson’s petition for review was timely | Johnson: Petition timely because effective suspension date and amended rules control | OPC: Petition untimely; Rule 4 requires filing within 30 days of entry | Court: Petition untimely (filed 150 days after entry); court lacks jurisdiction |
| Applicability of rule 7(f)(2) to finality | Johnson: Relied on amended rules and rule 7(f)(2) to argue nonfinality | OPC: Rule 7(f)(2) inapplicable where order follows a trial rather than disposing of a motion | Court: Rule 7(f)(2) inapplicable here; prior cases applying it involved orders disposing of motions |
| Whether time to appeal runs from entry or from sanction effective date | Johnson: Time should run from effective suspension date set in Order | OPC: Time runs from date of entry under appellate rule 4(a) | Court: Time runs from date of entry (June 15); sanction effective date does not affect appeal deadline |
Key Cases Cited
- McGibbon v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 345 P.3d 550 (Utah 2015) (jurisdictional rule cited for lack of review when appeal untimely)
- State v. Clark, 251 P.3d 829 (Utah 2011) (law applied is that in effect at time of regulated event)
- Butler v. Corp. of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 337 P.3d 280 (Utah 2014) (finality in orders disposing of motions)
- Central Utah Water Conservancy Dist. v. King, 297 P.3d 619 (Utah 2013) (finality of orders denying motions)
- Giusti v. Sterling Wentworth Corp., 201 P.3d 966 (Utah 2009) (finality of orders granting motions)
- Code v. Utah Dep’t of Health, 162 P.3d 1097 (Utah 2007) (finality of memorandum decisions resolving motions)