Stevens v. Collard

863 P.2d 534, 207 Utah Adv. Rep. 41, 1993 Utah App. LEXIS 37, 1993 WL 57757
CourtCourt of Appeals of Utah
DecidedFebruary 22, 1993
Docket910020-CA
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 863 P.2d 534 (Stevens v. Collard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Utah primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stevens v. Collard, 863 P.2d 534, 207 Utah Adv. Rep. 41, 1993 Utah App. LEXIS 37, 1993 WL 57757 (Utah Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

ORDER ON REMAND

We issued our Amended Opinion in this matter on September 1, 1992. Stevens v. Collard, 837 P.2d 593 (Utah Ct.App.1992). Appellee Collard subsequently filed a petition for certiorari to the Utah Supreme Court. On January 7, 1993, the Supreme Court entered the following order thereon:

Defendant’s petition for certiorari is this day granted, without further briefing by the parties required.
The court of appeals’ restrictive reading in this case of what constitutes relevant factors of changed circumstances is in conflict with Smith v. Smith, 793 P.2d 407 (Utah Ct.App.1990). Consideration of the factors of child visitation and plaintiff’s changed physical circumstances alleged by defendant is required to satisfy the two prongs of Hogge v. Hogge, 649 P.2d 51 (Utah 1982) and Elmer v. Elmer, 776 P.2d 599 (Utah 1989) (evidence of material change in circumstances and child’s best interest).
The case is remanded to the court of appeals with instructions to amend its order to the trial court. The court of appeals should instruct the trial court to take evidence on all four factors (unemployment, plaintiffs’s move to his parents’ home, child visitation, and plaintiff’s changed physical circumstances), so as to establish whether plaintiff’s changed circumstances are legally sufficient to reconsider the custody issue. As so modified, the court of appeals’ ruling stands.

Accordingly, while our ruling otherwise stands, our mandate to the trial court is hereby modified. Anything in our Amended Opinion to the contrary notwithstanding, the trial court is directed to take evidence on the factors of unemployment, plaintiff’s move to his parents’ home, child visitation, and plaintiff’s changed physical circumstances, so as to establish whether plaintiff’s changed circumstances are legally sufficient to reconsider the custody issue.

All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Signora v. Liberty Travel, Inc.
886 A.2d 284 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2005)
Wright v. Wright
941 P.2d 646 (Court of Appeals of Utah, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
863 P.2d 534, 207 Utah Adv. Rep. 41, 1993 Utah App. LEXIS 37, 1993 WL 57757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-collard-utahctapp-1993.