Seamons v. Brandley
268 P.3d 195
Utah Ct. App.2011Background
- Brandley appeals the district court's November 26, 2010 order granting Seamons's petition to nullify a lien; the court affirms.
- Brandley argued the trial court introduced new evidence and that comments at a October 14, 2010 hearing made the court a material witness.
- Brandley failed to show that the issues were preserved for appeal with a timely, specific objection and record support.
- The Utah preservation rule requires contemporaneous objection and specific preservation, with record citations and authority.
- The court held that, because preservation and briefing deficiencies were present, it would not address Brandley's issues and affirmed the district court.
- The opinion wraps with a general affirmance of the district court's decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Brandley’s issue preserved for appeal? | Brandley preserved issues because they had been dealt with previously. | Brandley failed to preserve with timely, specific objections and record support. | No; issues not preserved for review. |
| Are Brandley’s briefing and record citations adequate? | Briefing adequately developed the issues with authority. | Briefing is inadequate, with inaccurate citations and insufficient analysis. | Briefing inadequate; issues not reviewed. |
Key Cases Cited
- LaChanee v. Richman, 2011 UT App 40 (Utah Court of Appeals 2011) (preservation and appellate-briefing requirements for issues)
- 438 Main St. v. Easy Heat, Inc., 2004 UT 72 (Utah Supreme Court 2004) (preservation and timing requirements for raising issues on appeal)
- State v. Johnson, 774 P.2d 1141 (Utah 1989) (contemporaneous objection requirement for appellate review)
- State v. Holgate, 2000 UT 74 (Utah Supreme Court 2000) (exceptional circumstances or plain error for preservation rule)
- O'Dea v. Olea, 2009 UT 46 (Utah Supreme Court 2009) (appellate briefing and preservation citation requirements)
- Spencer v. Pleasant View City, 2008 UT App 379 (Utah Court of Appeals 2008) (adequacy of briefing; burden on reviewing court)
- Spencer, 2003 UT App 379 (Utah Court of Appeals 2003) (principles for addressing inadequately briefed issues)