Vigil v. Bigelow
This text of 2012 UT App 91 (Vigil v. Bigelow) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
‐‐‐‐ooOoo‐‐‐‐
Jacob E. Vigil, ) PER CURIAM DECISION ) Petitioner and Appellant, ) Case No. 20111083‐CA ) v. ) FILED ) (March 29, 2012) Alfred Bigelow, Warden, ) ) 2012 UT App 91 Respondent and Appellee. )
‐‐‐‐‐
Third District, Salt Lake Department, 110918781 The Honorable Joseph C. Fratto Jr.
Attorneys: Jacob E. Vigil, Draper, Appellant Pro Se
Before Judges McHugh, Davis, and Christiansen.
¶1 Jacob E. Vigil seeks to appeal the district court’s minute entry of November 16, 2011, denying his motion for a temporary restraining order without prejudice. This matter is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition on the basis that the grounds for review are so insubstantial as not to merit further proceedings and consideration by the court. See Utah R. App. P. 10.
¶2 The district court’s jurisdiction is invoked by properly filing a civil complaint or petition for extraordinary relief. See Utah R. Civ. P. 3(b) (stating that “[t]he court shall have jurisdiction from the time of filing of the complaint or service of the summons and a copy of the complaint”); Mellor v. Cook, 587 P.2d 882, 884 (Utah 1979) (stating that prior to providing any injunctive relief, the jurisdiction of the court must be invoked by initiation of an action). Vigil did not file a complaint or a petition for extraordinary relief that would potentially invoke the district court’s jurisdiction. Instead, he merely filed a motion for a temporary restraining order unattached to any underlying case. This filing, by itself, was insufficient to invoke the district court’s jurisdiction. Accordingly, the district court properly denied the motion for a temporary restraining order as premature.
¶3 Affirmed.
____________________________________ Carolyn B. McHugh, Presiding Judge
____________________________________ James Z. Davis, Judge
____________________________________ Michele M. Christiansen, Judge
20111083‐CA 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2012 UT App 91, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vigil-v-bigelow-utahctapp-2012.