Kyle Athay v. Rich County, Utah, 291 P.3d 1014

Athay was injured when Ervin, fleeing a police pursuit, struck his vehicle (June 10, 1999).
Pursuit occurred across Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho; Bear Lake County deputies joined the Utah pursuit in Idaho.
Initial suit named Sheriff Stacey, Rich County, and Bear Lake County officials; Athay I (2005) and Athay II (2008) addressed prior disposition issues.
Trial in July 2010 against Rich County produced a verdict: 30% fault to Sheriff Stacey (Rich County) and 70% to Ervin; damages awarded were $2,720,126 economic and $1,000,000 non-economic.
Judgment entered October 8, 2010; Rich County moved for a new trial and sought disqualification of the judge; the court denied those motions and later denied JNOV; Athay appealed, and the district court’s decisions were affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Disqualification of judge for limited purpose	Athay (plaintiff) contends judge’s neutrality was compromised by staff conduct.	Rich County argues disqualification was required due to appearance of bias.	No reversible error; court properly denied limited disqualification.
First Motion for New Trial procedural defect	Rich County’s motion should be considered on merits, not procedural defaults.	Motion lacked an accompanying affidavit as required by I.R.C.P. 59(a)(7).	District court did not err; First Motion for New Trial procedurally defective.
Second Motion for New Trial timeliness and particularity	Rich County argues grounds were timely and specific.	Memorandum failed to state factual grounds with particularity as required by I.R.C.P. 59(a)(7).	District court did not err in striking Second Motion for New Trial as untimely/insufficient.
Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict	Sufficient evidence supported the verdict of reckless disregard.	There was insufficient evidence for recklessness.	District court did not err in denying JNOV; substantial evidence supported recklessness.
Attorney fees on appeal	Athay seeks fees under I.C. § 12-121 for frivolous appeal.	Arguments were not frivolous, but some issues were improperly framed.	Athay awarded attorney fees on appeal.

Sivak v. State, 112 Idaho 197 (Idaho 1986) (disqualification and judicial discretion standards)
Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (U.S. 1994) (bias standard for recusal—extreme standard for impartiality)
Bach v. Bagley, 148 Idaho 784 (Idaho 2010) (high standard for recusal; lack of bias evidence)
Kuhn v. Coldwell Banker Landmark, Inc., 150 Idaho 240 (Idaho 2010) (mandatory contemporaneous affidavit requirement for 59(a)(7))
Johannsen v. Utterbeck, 146 Idaho 423 (Idaho 2008) (particularity requirement for 59(a)(7) grounds)
Hall v. Farmers Alliance Mut. Ins. Co., 145 Idaho 313 (Idaho 2008) (interpretation of I.R.C.P. rules; standard of review)
Reichmann v. State, 966 So.2d 298 (Fla. 2007) (ex parte communications through court staff; caution against perceived bias)
Gillingham Const., Inc. v. Newby–Wiggins Const., Inc., 142 Idaho 15 (Idaho 2005) (standard of review for appellate reversal on JNOV)
Johannsen v. Utterbeck, 146 Idaho 423 (Idaho 2008) (particularity requirement for 59(a)(7) grounds)