Davis v. Snyder

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
 

----ooOoo----

Steven C. Davis and Karen R. Davis,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v.

Craig M. Snyder and Richard S. Nemelka,

Defendants and Appellees.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20040576-CA
 

F I L E D
(November 4, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 399

-----

Third District, Salt Lake Department

The Honorable Leslie A. Lewis

Attorneys: Steven C. Davis and Karen R. Davis, Moberly, Missouri, Appellants Pro Se

-----

Before Judges Billings, Davis, and Orme.

PER CURIAM:

    Steven and Karen Davis appeal the trial court's dismissal of their complaint. This matter is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition based on the lack of a substantial question for review. See Utah R. App. P. 10(e).

    The Davises filed a complaint in the Fourth District Court in March 2003, which was transferred to the Third District in June 2003. In April 2004, the trial court sent notice to the Davises that they must appear to show cause why their complaint should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Utah Rule of Judicial Administration 4-103. The notice stated that failure to appear would result in the dismissal of the case. The Davises failed to appear at the order to show cause hearing, resulting in the dismissal of their complaint.

    On appeal, the Davises fail to present any reason for their failure to appear or their failure to prosecute the case. The memorandum filed in response to this court's motion deals largely with matters extraneous to the dismissal of their complaint, which is the only issue on appeal. In attacking the dismissal of their case for failure to prosecute, the Davises "must offer a reasonable excuse for [their] lack of diligence." Meadow Fresh Farms v. Utah State Univ., 813 P.2d 1216, 1218 (Utah Ct. App. 1991). The Davises argue only that the date of transfer is incorrect, but even if true it has no bearing on their failure to appear at the show cause hearing. The Davises have offered no excuse for their nonappearance, and thus fail to present a question for review regarding the appropriateness of the dismissal.

    Accordingly, the trial court's dismissal of the case is affirmed.

______________________________

Judith M. Billings,

Presiding Judge

______________________________

James Z. Davis, Judge

______________________________

Gregory K. Orme, Judge