Schmidt v. Petersen
Schmidt v. Petersen, 2025 UT App 12 (Tenney, J.)
Civil Procedure
The Utah Court of Appeals held:
- The district court did not err in revoking an ex parte civil stalking injunction. Plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance that Respondent engaged in a course of conduct directed at Plaintiff.
- The district court appropriately considered Respondent’s cumulative conduct in determining that Plaintiff did not carry his burden under the civil stalking statute, and if it didn’t, the error was harmless.
- Practice tip: The cumulative analysis requirement in the civil stalking statute applies when determining whether a person’s acts constitute a course of conduct and whether a person’s conduct would cause emotional distress to a reasonable person. However, it is unclear whether the cumulative analysis requirement applies to the initial question of whether an actor committed the acts at issue.