Gillmor v United Park City Mines, et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ----ooOoo---Nadine F. Gillmor, Plaintiff, v. United Park City Mines; Blue Ledge Corporation; Susan A. Megur; Steve Megur; John J. Cummings; Susan S. Cummings; Eremalos Development; Estate of Charles F. Gillmor; and all other persons claiming any right, title, or interest adverse to the interests of the plaintiff, Defendants. ______________________________ Blue Ledge Corporation, Counterclaimant and Appellant, v. Nadine F. Gillmor, and all unknown persons who claim any interest in the subject matter of the action, Counterclaim Defendant and Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not For Official Publication) Case No. 20080200-CA F I L E D (May 8, 2008) 2008 UT App 163 ----Third District, Silver Summit Department, 940600087 The Honorable Bruce C. Lubeck Attorneys: Rosemary J. Beless and P. Bruce Badger, Salt Lake City, for Appellant David W. Scofield, Thomas W. Peters, and Ronald F. Price, Salt Lake City, for Appellees ----- Before Judges Greenwood, Billings, and McHugh. PER CURIAM: This matter is before the court on Appellant Blue Ledge Corporation's suggestion of mootness. Blue Ledge argues that the district court has issued an order granting it the relief it requested in this court, thereby rendering the issues advanced in its appeal moot. "[A] case is moot where the requested judicial relief cannot affect the rights of the litigants." Jones v. Schwendiman, 721 P.2d 893, 894 (Utah 1986) (per curiam). Blue Ledge filed its notice of appeal after the district court issued an order rejecting Blue Ledge's proposed final judgment and stating that the court's previous order constituted the final judgment. Blue Ledge argued that the court's previous order could not be considered final because it did not include a description of the property at issue. On March 21, 2008, the district court determined that Blue Ledge was correct that the final order should have included a description of the property at issue. Accordingly, the court issued a new final judgment that included a description of the property. This final judgment moots all issues raised in Blue Ledge's appeal because the relief requested by Blue Ledge has been granted by the district court, and thus this court can no longer provide relief that affects the rights of the litigants. Accordingly, this matter is dismissed.1 ______________________________ Pamela T. Greenwood, Presiding Judge ______________________________ Judith M. Billings, Judge ______________________________ Carolyn B. McHugh, Judge 1. Gillmor also filed a motion for summary disposition based upon other grounds. However, because the issues involved in the appeal are now moot, there is no need to review the arguments advanced by Gillmor in the motion. 20080200-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.
