Pon v. Brewer
Pon v. Brewer, 2020 UT App 99 (Christiansen Forster, J.)
Brewer filed an objection to a commissioner’s permanent protective order 14 days after the order was entered. The district court dismissed the objection as untimely. Brewer appealed and filed a rule 60(b) motion to set aside the order. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed, holding:
- The district court did not err in applying the 10-day deadline in Utah Code section 78B-7-107(1)(f) instead of the 14-day deadline in Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 108(a). While rule 108(a) applies to decisions of commissioners, section 78B-7-107 applies specifically to protective order proceedings. The more specific rule applies.
- Brewer could not appeal the district court’s denial of his rule 60(b) motion because he did not amend his notice of appeal to include the court’s ruling on that motion. Because his constitutional argument was raised in that motion, the court of appeals is jurisdictionally precluded from addressing it.