Should You Represent Yourself or Get an Attorney?
The Online Court Assistance Program is not an attorney, nor does it provide legal advice. When you file papers with the court that you create with the program, you are representing yourself in court.
Choosing to represent yourself is an important decision. When you represent yourself, you are acting as your own attorney. You will be responsible for all the information you prepare and file with the court and will be accountable to the final judgment of the court.
Additional information about finding legal help is available on these pages:
SALT LAKE CITY — Land-use advocates from across Utah gathered Saturday for the Take Back Utah parade and rally.
The event, which started at the Utah Fairpark and made its way to the state Capitol, was held to promote resistance to the federal government's control of public lands in Utah. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, and Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, addressed the crowd, drawing cheers as they spoke of the fight for state's rights going on in Washington.
"We have, unfortunately, an administration right now that doesn't have quite the same vision for public lands that we do," Bishop said.
Persons arrested for DUI will be subject to additional criminal law penalties not addressed here -- including jail time, fines, and community service. Such criminal penalties are typically more discretionary than those identified in this chart, and are therefore more difficult to accurately predict. Generally speaking, first-time DUI offenders can expect to incur a fine, and face the possibility of jail time. Repeat DUI offenders will incur harsher fines, and will almost certainly be sentenced to a number of days in jail. Penalties will be harsher still if the DUI offender was involved in an accident in which someone else was injured or killed.
by Scott M. McCullough and David W. Macbeth
After dad’s death a shelter or bypass trust was left for mother and the children, along with a QTIP trust for mother. Both mother and an institutional trustee were named as successor co-trustees of both trusts. Mother continued to use the trust assets for her benefit and for the benefit of their descendants (specifically providing for the higher education of her grandchildren). After a series of unfortunate events mother was unable to handle her own affairs. The family desired to continue using the trust assets for the benefit of the family in the same manner mother had used them. However, the institutional trustee was unwilling to act without safety nets, such as court approval, for every decision (presumably for fear of being sued) and roadblocked all of the distribution decisions the family made. Even in the face of a unanimously signed consent by the family authorizing the institutional trustee to act, the institutional trustee refused. After months and months of red tape and hassle, not to mention the mounting legal and trustee fees, the family fired the institution and replaced that trustee with another (as allowed by the trust) in the hope that the new institution would work with them and not against them.
Legislation » Guv vetoes one bill because of a technicality.
By Robert Gehrke | The Salt Lake Tribune
First Published Mar 28 2012 12:16 pm • Last Updated Mar 28 2012 11:22 pm
Gov. Gary Herbert took action on the last of 477 bills sent to him by the Utah Legislature, vetoing one that dealt with seismic studies for schools due to a technicality.
It was the governor’s second veto this session — the first being a controversial abstinence-only sex education bill that sparked a massive outpouring of opposition and support, with more than 8,000 Utahns weighing in on the measure.
"After reviewing every bill, I recognize and thank the Legislature for the hard work and consensus-building that goes into each one," Herbert said in a statement. "Most importantly, we prioritized correctly and funded education efforts. We also spurred further growth in the economy by reducing taxes, eliminating unnecessary business regulation and empowering the private sector to succeed in the free market."
By Kristin K. Woods
A guardianship can be an essential tool for a spouse, child, or other caregiver who is charged with managing and protecting the assets of a loved one who is no longer able to make responsible decisions. However, because there are emergency provisions within Utah’s guardianship statutes that allow for an immediate, temporary guardianship, there exists the potential for abuse. The severe and potentially devastating impact that a guardianship has upon the rights of the ward requires members of the Utah legal community, both attorneys and judges, to pursue and decide guardianship cases with caution and discernment.
Utah Code section 75-5-310 provides the procedure for one to acquire a temporary guardianship. This statute states that if an emergency exists, or if an already appointed guardian is not performing his or her duties, and the court finds that the welfare of an incapacitated person “requires immediate action,” the court may, without notice, appoint a temporary guardian to serve for a period of not more than thirty days. Utah Code Ann. § 75-5-310(1) (Michie 1993). As an apparent safeguard against potential abuses, the statute also requires the court to hold a hearing to consider the appropriateness of the temporary guardianship within five days of the appointment of the temporary guardian. The ward must be noticed of this hearing, and the court “may appoint an appropriate official or attorney to represent that person in the proceeding” unless the ward retains his or her own attorney. Id. § 75-5-310(2).
See Full Article on Utah State Bar Website
More Articles ...
- Profiles Added
- New School year Supplemental Public Education Bill SB4003
- Fewer US homes repossessed by banks in 2012
- LinkedIn Profile Created
- Google+ (Plus) Profile Created for Terry Spencer
- A MESSAGE FROM OUR MANAGING PARTNER
- T R Spencer Blog Now Live!
- Divorcing on a Budget Tips
- Protective Order Consultation & Representation