Wednesday, November 17, 2010
The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the denial of a motion to disqualify a judge in civil litigation based on an allegation that the judge had been exposed to confidential information from arbitration. The court concluded that the motion was untimely:
[The moving party's] counsel urges us to find that its disqualification motion was timely, despite being filed almost three years into the litigation, after enough proceedings had occured to generate over forty volumes of record, and over sixteen months after [the relied on Utah decision] was published. [The moving party] asserts that its motion was timely because [its] counsel filed it within twenty days of attending a Continuing Legal Education seminar where he learned of the legal basis for filing the motion. We are wholly unpersuaded by this argument.
The litigation involves a dispute over the construction of a baseball field. (Mike Frisch)