HAL Company, LLC v. Multi Media Musketeers

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ----ooOoo---HAL Company, LLC, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Multi Media Musketeers and Jeff Brewer, Defendants and Appellants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not For Official Publication) Case No. 20050226-CA F I L E D (April 13, 2006) 2006 UT App 154 ----Fourth District, Provo Department, 020405666 The Honorable Samuel D. McVey Attorneys: Joseph R. Goodman, Salt Lake City, for Appellants Jackson Howard and Leslie W. Slaugh, Provo, for Appellee ----- Before Judges Davis, Orme, and Thorne. PER CURIAM: Multi Media Musketeers and Jeff Brewer (collectively, Brewer) appeal the amended judgment entered against them. We affirm. An appellate brief must include an argument containing "the contentions and reasons of the appellant with respect to the issues presented . . . with citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied on." Utah R. App. P. 24(a)(9). "Briefs must contain reasoned analysis based upon relevant legal authority. An issue is inadequately briefed when the overall analysis of the issue is so lacking as to shift the burden of research and argument to the reviewing court." State v. Sloan, 2003 UT App 170,¶13, 72 P.3d 138 (quotations and citation omitted). Briefs that fail to comply with rule 24 may be disregarded. See id. "It is well established that a reviewing court will not address arguments that are not adequately briefed." Spencer v. Pleasant View City, 2003 UT App 379,¶20, 80 P.3d 546. Brewer's brief fails to comply with the briefing standards of rule 24. The argument does not cite any relevant legal authority to support any position, fails to present any reasoned legal analysis, and contains only conclusory allegations not supported by any record or legal citation. Two issues are presented in "arguments" of one paragraph with no authority. The argument is insufficient to permit appellate review of any issue stated. As a result, we affirm the trial court's judgment. Affirmed. ______________________________ James Z. Davis, Judge ______________________________ Gregory K. Orme, Judge ______________________________ William A. Thorne Jr., Judge 20050226-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.