Johnson v. Johnson

Johnson v. Johnson

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
 

----ooOoo----

State of Utah, Office of Recovery Services, ex rel.;
State of California, ex rel.; and Paula J. Johnson,

Petitioners and Appellees,

v.

Johnnie B. Johnson,

Respondent and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20040929-CA
 

F I L E D
(January 6, 2005)
 

2005 UT App 1

 

-----

Third District, Salt Lake Department

The Honorable Joseph C. Fratto Jr.

Attorneys: Johnnie B. Johnson, Taylorsville, Appellant Pro Se

Mark L. Shurtleff and Karla Block, Salt Lake City, for Appellees

-----

Before Judges Billings, Bench, and Greenwood.

PER CURIAM:

    Johnnie B. Johnson (Johnson) appeals from an order entered by the trial court that terminated State proceedings to register a foreign judgment in Utah and denied affirmative relief to Johnson as moot. This case is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition.

    On August 7, 2003, the trial court entered an order finding Johnson in contempt for failure to pay support ordered by a California court and purportedly registered in Utah. Johnson appealed and this court entered a memorandum decision on June 4, 2004, vacating the order of contempt and remanding this case to the trial court for the court to apply the correct procedure for registering a foreign judgment.

    Johnson then filed a motion with the trial court, requesting relief from the previous judgment entered by the trial court. The State responded that this issue was moot, due to the ruling of this court on June 4. The State also moved to withdraw its petition to register the foreign judgment.

    On October 1, 2004, the trial court granted the State's motion to withdraw its petition and dismissed the matter. The trial court also ruled that Johnson's motion was moot and denied the same.

    We hold that Johnson's appeal from this order is moot. "An issue on appeal is considered moot when the requested judicial relief cannot affect the rights of the litigants." State v. Vicente, 2004 UT 6,¶3, 84 P.3d 1191 (citation and quotations omitted). "This court generally does not consider mooted questions on appeal." Id. Because the trial court dismissed the action, a decision by this court on the issues raised by Johnson would have no impact on Johnson's rights. Therefore, we decline to address the questions raised by Johnson regarding the order. Moreover, for the same reasons, the trial court did not err in denying as moot Johnson's motion for relief from judgment. See Merhish v. H. A. Folsom & Assocs., 646 P.2d 731, 732 (Utah 1982).

    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot.

______________________________

Judith M. Billings,

Presiding Judge

______________________________

Russell W. Bench,

Associate Presiding Judge

______________________________

Pamela T. Greenwood, Judge