Larsen v. Wright
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ooOoo James H. Larsen, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Randall Wright, Defendant and Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PER CURIAM DECISION Case No. 20110770 CA F I L E D (January 6, 2012) 2012 UT App 9 Third District, West Jordan Department, 110401936 The Honorable Andrew H. Stone Attorneys: James H. Larsen, Provo, Appellant Pro Se Peter C. Schofield, Orem, for Appellee Before Judges McHugh, Thorne, and Christiansen. ¶1 James H. Larsen appeals the trial court s order dismissing his complaint. This is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition based on the lack of a substantial question for review. Larsen failed to respond to the motion. As a result of his failure to respond and the lack of a viable legal issue identified in his docketing statement, he has failed to identify a substantial question for review warranting further consideration by this court. See Utah R. App. P. 10. Absent a substantial issue for review, this court may summarily affirm a district court s order. ¶2 Affirmed. ____________________________________ Carolyn B. McHugh, Presiding Judge ____________________________________ William A. Thorne Jr., Judge ____________________________________ Michele M. Christiansen, Judge 20110770 CA 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
