Utah Family Lawyer on Moving

In situations where court ordered parenting time has been established, and the residential parent wants to move, pursuant to Utah law, the other parent is entitled to notice of the move and, if requested or ordered by the court, a hearing.  These notice provisions apply REGARDLESS of whether the non-residential or non-moving parent contests the move. As a relocation lawyer, I’ve seen parents make mistakes in doing this before, which can require a big problem for them.

Utah Family Lawyer on Moving

A parent has a fundamental right to live where he or she wants to live, BUT they do not have a fundamental right to permanently relocate the child in violation of the Utah Revised Code or the parties’ court order.

Depending on the language of your court order and/or the language in the Local Rules of the court who issued the order, simply moving a certain distance away MAY automatically trigger a change in custody, shared parenting, school placement parent, parenting time or other provisions of  your parenting order.

Utah law, case law and the code  requires a court to consider whether either parent has established a residence, or is planning to establish a residence, outside this state when determining the best interest of the child.

In addition, pursuant to Utah law when determining whether shared parenting is still in the best interest of the child the court must consider,

  • The geographic proximity of the parents to each other, as the proximity relates to the practical considerations of shared parenting;

Utah laws requires a court to consider

  • The geographical location of the residence of each parent and the distance between those residences, and if the person is not a parent, the geographical location of that person’s residence and the distance between that person’s residence and the child’s residence;
  • Whether either parent has established a residence or is planning to establish a residence outside this state;

Sometimes parents want to move for legitimate reasons, and sometimes they want to move to thwart the other parent’s access to the child.  Regardless of the reason for the move, if the move creates additional distance between the child and the other parent, the move IS going to have an impact on the parenting time of the non-moving parent.  The question is, how much of an impact, and does the non-moving parent object?

If the non-moving parent believes that the impact upon their parenting time and relationship with the child is significant, he or she may wish to modify custody, shared parenting, or the school placement parent in a shared parenting plan.  At a minimum, the parties will need to consider whether a new parenting time schedule is appropriate.

Can you sue for a broken heart?

Did you have a change of heart and leave your fiancé at the altar? If so, be glad that you are in Utah where “heart balm actions” have been abolished.  Many years ago there was the Heart Balm Statute, which says that no person shall be liable for civil damages in the following types of cases:

  • breach of a promise to marry
  • alienation of affections
  • criminal conversation

Later cases have generally found that the following types of actions are also abolished under the statute, at least when it relates to civil damages for a failed relationship or a person wronged in a relationship:

  • enticement
  • intentional infliction of emotional distress
  • fraud
  • negligence

Although some states will still allow heart balm actions, Utah does not.  You cannot sue the person who stole your spouse away from you for money damages, and you cannot sue your spouse for money damages in a civil case for cheating on you.  Generally, you cannot successfully sue your fiancé for leaving you at the altar, even if you had already spent a lot of money on the wedding.

Be sure to also take a look at our article about returning the wedding ring after a broken engagement in Utah.

There is no broken heart law in Utah.

Free Consultation with Family Lawyer in Utah

If you have a question about divorce law or if you need to relocate to another state, call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/172053755289


Utah Father’s Rights Attorney

In Utah, does a father have a right to get visitation, even if paternity has not yet been established? Does the law regarding an Utah Father’s Rights include the right for the father to request temporary orders regarding visitation or custody, even if paternity has not yet been established?

Utah Father's Rights Attorney

The answer is YES.  Since the husband is presumed to be the biological father when a child is born to a couple who is married, this issue applies to Utah Father’s Rights situations where the mother and father of a child were never married.  Temporary Custody Order While Action is Pending allows the following regarding an Utah Father’s Rights to visitation and/or custody while a court case is pending, or temporary orders:

In any proceeding pertaining to the allocation of parental rights and responsibilities for the care of a childwhen requested in the complaint, answer, or counterclaim, or by motion served with the pleading, upon satisfactory proof by affidavit duly filed with the clerk of the court, the court, without oral hearing and for good cause shownmay make a temporary order regarding the allocation of parental rights and responsibilities for the care of the child while the action is pending.

If a parent and child relationship has not already been established pursuant to section 3111.02 of the Revised Code, the court may take into consideration when determining whether to award parenting time, visitation rights, or temporary custody to a putative father that the putative father is named on the birth record of the child, the child has the putative father’s surname, or a clear pattern of a parent and child relationship between the child and the putative father exists.

There are several things about that statute that you want to read carefully.  Every word matters.  Here is some additional information about important phrases from the statute:



  • First, this means a COURT  It does NOT apply to an administrative proceeding for child support through the ORS.  The ORS has no authority to order visitation.  Sometimes, during an administrative child support proceeding, if the parties agree, the ORS attorney or liason will give the parties a form to seek court ordered visitation, but that form is still submitted to the COURT, and is not ordered by the ORS.
  • Second, notice the phrase “parentalrights and responsibilities”.  This means that if a Father files a motion in an actions which was only filed as a grandparent visitation proceeding, the court may find that it has no authority to make temporary orders for visitation for the Father.  The Father may file a motion to be made a party to the grandparent visitation proceeding, but unless he files a Complaint for the Allocation of Parental Rights and Responsibilities (and, if applicable, for establishment of paternity), the court may find that the action is not a “proceeding pertaining to the allocation of parental rights and responsibilities), and therefore deny the Father’s request for Temporary Visitation.  (The Mother would, at that point, still have full custody of the child pursuant to Utah law and would not need temporary orders for visitation.)
  • Temporary Orders are available during the INITIAL proceeding, not in post-decree proceedings.
  • Temporary Orders of visitation are not available in a court proceeding which is merely an objection to an administrative child support order.  The court proceeding has to include a complaint, answer or counterclaim for parental rights and responsibilities.


To establish an Utah Father’s Rights to temporary visitation or custody, the Father, or his Utah Father’s Rights Attorney, should request temporary orders pursuant to the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure in his Complaint, or his Answer to the Mother’s Complaint, if the Mother filed the Complaint.  In the alternative, the Father can seek his Utah Father’s Rights by filing a motion.  It is unclear from the statute whether his Motion must be served with his Complaint, Answer or Counterclaim, but it is the better practice to file the Motion at the outset of the case.  In addition, sometimes a request tucked at the end of a Complaint Answer or Counterclaim escapes the notice of the court at the initial hearing, but a Motion which is pending on the Court’s Docket is more likely to be noticed and addressed at the first hearing.

Something that is important to note is that if child support is not yet established, but paternity is established (perhaps through an Affidavit signed at the child’s birth which allows the Father’s name to be on the child’s birth certificate), Utah judges and magistrates almost always establish a temporary order of child support.  If the father, or his attorney, has not already filed a Motion for Temporary Orders or requested temporary orders in his complaint, this would be a great time to point out that Utah law allows the following:

Whenever a court issues a child support order, it shall include in the order specific provisions for regular, holiday, vacation, parenting time, and special visitation in accordance with the sections of the Utah Code or in accordance with any other applicable section of Utah law.

Free Consultation with a Utah Father’s Rights Lawyer

If you have a question about child custody question or if you need to protect or enforce your rights, please call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/172028973174

Business Lawyers in Utah for Gold and Silver

“Shafting” the IRS is the verbiage used in the article in Forbes, not ours, though who hasn’t dreamed of evading, er, we mean finding loopholes in taxes at least once in their lives? Well, now the secret is out, thanks to writer Brian Domitrovic, who may be onto something. Obligatory disclosure: he’s not a tax lawyer. Interestingly, he cites a 2011 law that was passed in Utah “banning taxes on the use of gold and silver coins as currency and permitting residents to remit taxes in these coins.” Apparently Oklahoma recently did something similar. But before business lawyers in Utah as well as entrepreneurs and wealth management specialists across the Beehive State dismiss this small bit of legislation as trivial, Domitrovic points out that transacting in gold can save you tons on taxes.

Business Lawyers in Utah for Gold and Silver

Maybe not literally tons, and almost certainly not tons of gold, whose current market value is something like $1,267 per ounce. So here’s the first thing: gold’s official Treasury price is $42.22 per ounce, meaning that some savvy individuals or companies who leverage the legal know-how of their business lawyers in Utah could be saving hundreds of thousands of dollars on taxes each year if they worked in gold. So, Business lawyers in Utah may be called on in greater demand for transacting in gold because it can shaft the IRS.

But hold on a minute, some of you astute readers of legal news might say. What about the “federal law” that requires you to “declare as taxable the gain on any market appreciation of the gold you use to make purchases”? Well, that’s the other thing: it’s a “federal law” in quotation marks. It’s not a reallaw. It’s what Dimitrovic calls “administrative law,” which is basically an idea that the Internal Review Service came up with and tossed back and forth in a series of emails (8,000 pages worth, as discovered under the Freedom of Information Act) and said “okay, we’re doing this requirement of market appreciation on gold thing.” How enforceable is administrative law? You’d have to ask your business lawyers in Utah: legal counsel isn’t superseded by Dimitrovic’s blog-based advice.

Just think about it, though: if enough people get together and decide to make transactions in gold, “somebody might clear, for example, $3,000 in gold income a year, or $90,000 if translated into paper dollars.” And given Utah’s 2011 statute, even the most experienced business lawyers in Utah would be hard pressed to disagree that everything with that plan seems above board. And when you’re only paying taxes on $3,000, why wouldn’t you get on board with this idea?

Part of the problem is finding enough people to get together to decide to make the transactions in gold. If the gold movement doesget traction though, “it could have the effect of requiring business in this country to cut their taxation costs by arbitraging the gold-note dollar spread that the United States has allowed to emerge over the past century of serious inflation.” Gold has the potential, like Bitcoin to stick it to the man (i.e. the IRS), with the added bonus of being constitutionally protected since 1787 and time tested through copious amounts of litigation in the 19th century. Pony, up, people; together we can “shaft the IRS.”

Free Consultation with a Utah Business Lawyer

If you are here, you probably have a business law issue you need help with, call Ascent Law for your free business law consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/172019718094

Financial Misconduct in Utah Divorce Cases

What is financial misconduct?  In Utah, it is a basis upon which an Utah divorce court can make a distributive award.  

Financial Misconduct in Utah Divorce Cases

Consider this:

If a spouse has engaged in financial misconduct, including, but not limited to, the dissipation, destruction, concealment, nondisclosure, or fraudulent disposition of assets, the court may compensate the offended spouse with a distributive award or with a greater award of marital property.

So what does this mean in plain English?  It means if you are getting divorced and your spouse is destroying, ruining, hiding, or getting rid of assets in a sneaky way, the court can give you some of their separate property to punish them.  When a court does this, it is called a distributive award. 

So what is separate property?

(a) “Separate property” means all real and personal property and any interest in real or personal property that is found by the court to be any of the following:

(i) An inheritance by one spouse by bequest, devise, or descent during the course of the marriage;

(ii) Any real or personal property or interest in real or personal property that was acquired by one spouse prior to the date of the marriage;

(iii) Passive income and appreciation acquired from separate property by one spouse during the marriage;

(iv) Any real or personal property or interest in real or personal property acquired by one spouse after a decree of legal separation issued under section 3105.17 of the Revised Code;

(v) Any real or personal property or interest in real or personal property that is excluded by a valid antenuptial agreement;

(vi) Compensation to a spouse for the spouse’s personal injury, except for loss of marital earnings and compensation for expenses paid from marital assets;

(vii) Any gift of any real or personal property or of an interest in real or personal property that is made after the date of the marriage and that is proven by clear and convincing evidence to have been given to only one spouse.

So what does this all mean?  It means if your spouse has separate property, and they are playing games with the marital property, the court can remedy this by giving you some of their separate property.

Retroactive Arrearage Modification Not Prohibited

The Supreme Court has decided that parties to a support order may modify child support by agreement.  In Byrd v. Knuckles the Supreme Court held that nothing prohibits a juvenile court from adjusting an existing arrearage in child support if the parties agree to do so.

In this case, as part of an agreement to consent to a step-parent adoption, the Mother agreed that the Father’s child support arrearage would be reduced by 50%.  After the adoption was completed, the Father attempted to have his child support arrearage reduced pursuant to this agreement, and the Court found that it had no authority to reduce this arrearage under the Law.  This matter was appealed, and then brought before Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court noted that this decision does not mean that a court MUST accept a parties’ agreement to reduce a prior arrearage, but that a court is not prohibited from doing so pursuant to the Law.  As in this case, this issue is particularly relevant where one party is willing to sign away their legal rights in order to be released from future, and possibly past child support obligations.

Free Consultation with a Utah Divorce Lawyer

If you have a question about divorce law or if you need to start or defend against a divorce case in Utah call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171993500689

Child Sexual Abuse Investigation

In rape and sexual abuse of child investigations, the detective will usually call the suspect to get her “side of the story.”  After charges are filed, a defendant calls to ask me if the interview can be thrown out because the officer did not read her Miranda warnings. This is important for you to think about because as a child sexual abuse defense lawyer, you want to do everything you can to protect yourself before, during, and after the investigation phase.

Child Sexual Abuse Investigation

Most people, because of crime shows, are very familiar with the Miranda warnings.  But most do not realize that an officer does not have to read a suspect her Miranda warnings unless she is in custody.  So, if the officer is questioning the suspect at her home, it is not likely that the officer needs to give any Miranda warnings.

If you are being questioned and are unsure if you are in custody or not, ask the officer if you are “free to leave.” If you are questioned without being Mirandized, but you were not in police custody, your interview is still admissible at trial.

If a suspect is in the back of a police car or at the police station, she is in custody fo purposes of Miranda and the warnings must be given before an interrogation begins.  If the officer fails to issue Miranda warnings, the interview will likely be tossed at a motion to suppress hearing, meaning the prosecutor cannot use the interview at trial.

If, however, the defendant testifies at her trial and she says something different than she said in the police interview, the prosecutor will be allowed to use the interview to impeach her.  By talking to police, a suspect is potentially compromising her case.  Don’t talk to the police.  The police are not your friend, even if they are acting like they are.  The prosecutor won’t deal with your case more leniently if you talk, even though the police will tell you this.  You can always talk later –with the assistance of an attorney– if there is something you’d like the prosecutor to know.

If you are ever contacted by a detective for an interview, ask for a lawyer.  The police have to stop questioning you until a lawyer is provided to you.  Don’t compromise your rape or sexual abuse of a child case because of something you say.

Rape And Child Sex Cases At The Investigation Phase In Utah

Being investigated for rape or sexual abuse of a child?  Too many make the mistake of waiting to hiring a lawyer.  This is the most critical portion of the case sometimes.  Police officers often tell suspects they don’t need a lawyer and that telling their side of the story will curry favor with the prosecutor.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  Giving a statement to the police locks you into a specific defense if they case goes to trial.  You provide the prosecutor ammunition on cross-examination if you have spoken before.  If your testimony varies at all from your interview with the police, the prosecutor will impeach you with the prior interview and tell the jurors that you are lying.  And, the inconsistencies don’t have to be on major points.  Something that you may think is insignificant may become significant at trial.  Make sure that you ask for an attorney before giving an interview.  You have a right to remain silent and the prosecutor cannot use that silence against you, such as “John Doe must be guilty because he refused to tell us his side of the story.”  That is improper.

Once a rape or child investigation is completed, a warrant will go out and you could be picked up. A rape or sexual abuse of a child case is a high priority case for law enforcement and officers are going to focus on picking up these individuals once charges are filed.

If you have an attorney, most times the detective will work with your attorney to do a surrender.  Before going into court, the “wheels are greased” and a release or bail reduction is already worked out.  Remember, it’s easier to stay out of jail than to get out of jail.

Don’t make the mistake of waiting to call an attorney after the prosecutor decides to file charges.  Hire a competent lawyer to help you through the process.

Free Consultation with Child Sexual Abuse Defense Lawyer

When the police are coming after you for child sexual abuse or rape crimes, call us for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171983279289

Change of Circumstances and Grandparent Custody

The concept of “change of circumstances” is an important on in the context of child custody, but it’s complicated concept in family law.  When a person wants to change the court’s custody orders, there has to be a change in circumstances.

The first important question is “Whose circumstances have to have changed?”  The answer to that depends on whether the order is a shared parenting decree (two residential parents), joint custody (one parent and one non-parent) or whether a person (or persons) have legal custody (aka residential parent or sole custody).  In a nutshell, the question is “Shared Parenting, Joint Custody or Sole Custody?”

Change of Circumstances and Grandparent Custody

When a person has sole custody of a child (aka “legal custody” or sole residential parent), then the change of circumstances must be a change in the circumstances of the child or legal custodian.  It does not matter if the parent who has visitation only, (or has no visitation but simply retains his or her residual parental rights) has changed his or her circumstances, even if his or her circumstances have changed substantially.

In Alexander v. Alexander, the court of appeals for found that the trial court did not abuse it’s discretion when it overruled the Mother’s Motion to Change Allocation of Parental Rights and Responsibilities regarding her three children.  The children were in the custody of their paternal grandmother as a result of the agreement of the Mother and Father during their divorce.  The Mother had visitation (parenting time).

During the trial on the Mother’s Motion to Reallocate, Mother testified that she had been working for some time to make a more stable home for the children.  Among other things, Mother testified that she was employed and had lived in her apartment for a year and a half.  The trial court found that the change of circumstances must have occurred “in the circumstances of the child, the child’s residential parent, or either of the parents subject to a shared parenting decree“.  In this case, the changes were in the Mother’s circumstances.  In addition, the trial court found that the children have become more stable in the grandparents’ home, and so the “harm of a change in environment for the children outweighs any advantages that may have now arisen to justify a change.”

Even if there HAS been a change in circumstances of the RIGHT person, the court should not change custody unless the change is in the child’s best interest AND one of the following is true:

(i) The residential parent agrees to a change in the residential parent or both parents under a shared parenting decree agree to a change in the designation of residential parent.

(ii) The child, with the consent of the residential parent or of both parents under a shared parenting decree, has been integrated into the family of the person seeking to become the residential parent.

(iii) The harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantages of the change of environment to the child.

Free Consultation with Child Custody Lawyer

If you have a question about child custody question or if you need to collect back child support, please call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will aggressively fight for you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171959322434

Sexual Abuse and Assault

Sexual Abuse and Assault

William Estell was being prosecuted on multiple counts of forcible sodomy, sexual abuse, and aggravated sexual abuse of a child in two different Utah cases. He pleaded guilty, and expressed remorse in the courtroom, as documented by commentary in KSL news. Estell’s actions have met public dismay since 2008, when he was sentenced to 93 days in jail for a misdemeanor count of sexual battery. But the case most recently prosecuted by Utah attorneys to receive attention speculates that his perpetration of abuse could go back as many as 20 years.


Estell’s remorse seemed genuine enough to his sister (present on the day of his sentencing in court) but she worries about his safety and well-being in his 25-year prison sentence. “Prison isn’t a place for people with mental disabilities,” she said. 41-years-old, Estell is himself a victim of repeated sexual abuse at the hands of his father, leading to problems in his adult life and his own illegal actions. The sentencing judge commented on the situation before the court, saying, “This sentence is appropriate for the crime that has been committed, but I understand you were the victim. There was a tremendous breakdown in the system and that led to other victims.”

Utah attorneys prosecuting cases of sexual abuse and assault, especially of children, have a mountainous task ahead of them. Testimony from children is notoriously difficult to obtain – but not because of their traumatic experiences and sudden immersion into the monstrously intimidating adult world of courtrooms, gavels and technical names for private parts. Forced to recount their experience to obtain justice, children often shy away from the task that makes them feel re-traumatized and more vulnerable, which is something Estell knew well. The perpetrator selected his victims carefully, one of the Utah attorneys Coral Rose-Sanchez reported; he chose boys who spoke English as a second language, who were poor and whose parents knew little or nothing about navigating the legal system. With the deck stacked against them already, many of Estell’s victims didn’t even attempt to speak out or press charges, and for those who did, at least one had enough of a negative experience when law enforcement didn’t take the abuse report seriously that the family’s mistrust of the legal system has deepened. Another of Estell’s victims is in jail in another state for criminal activity, and still another struggles with depressive episodes around his sexual activity which he links to his abuse.

But it’s not only Estell’s victims that the system has failed to protect. As the judge acknowledged, it was Estell himself and his own prolonged experiences of sexual abuse as a child. Utah attorneys working in a court of law to right the wrongs of generations of abuse may find the situation more complex and more heartbreaking than anticipated, and society may find its own dark secrets continue to be hidden away in the mouths of children who are too traumatized to speak up. This is an age-old problem with no clear answers.

Free Consultation with a Criminal Defense Lawyer

When you need help from a criminal defense lawyer, call Ascent Law for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171949303554

SEC Charges Pastor with Defrauding Retirees

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced fraud charges and an emergency asset freeze obtained against a Michigan-based pastor accused of exploiting church members, retirees, and laid-off auto workers who were misled to believe they were investing in a successful real estate business.

SEC Charges Pastor with Defrauding Retirees

The SEC alleges that Larry Holley, the pastor of Abundant Life Ministries in Flint, Mich., cloaked his solicitations in faith-based rhetoric, replete with references to scripture and biblical figures.  Holley allegedly told prospective investors that as a person who “prayed for your children,” he was more trustworthy than a “banker” with their money.  According to the SEC’s complaint, Holley held financial presentations masked as “Blessed Life Conferences” at churches nationwide during which he asked congregants to fill out cards detailing their financial holdings, and he promised to pray over the cards and invited attendees to have one-on-one consultations with his team.  He allegedly called his investors “millionaires in the making.”

According to the SEC’s complaint, which also charges Holley’s company Treasure Enterprise LLC and his business associate Patricia Enright Gray, approximately $6.7 million was raised from more than 80 investors who were guaranteed high returns and told they were investing in a profitable real estate company with hundreds of residential and commercial properties.

According to the complaint, Gray advertised on a religious radio station based in Flint and singled out recently laid-off auto workers with severance packages to consult her for a “financial increase.”  Gray allegedly promised to roll over investors’ retirement funds into tax-advantaged Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA) and invest them in Treasure Enterprise.  The SEC alleges that no investor funds were deposited into IRAs, and Treasure Enterprise struggled to generate enough revenue from its real estate investments to support the business and make payments owed to investors.  Treasure Enterprise owes investors an estimated $1.9 million in past due payments, according to the SEC’s complaint.

“As alleged in our complaint, Holley and Gray targeted the retirement savings of churchgoers, building a bond of trust purportedly based on faith but actually based on false promises,” said David Glockner.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Holley, Gray, and Treasure Enterprise were not registered to sell investments.  The SEC encourages investors to check the background of anyone offering to sell them investments by doing a quick search on the SEC’s investor website.

The SEC has obtained a temporary restraining order in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Utah that freezes the assets of Holley, Gray, and Treasure Enterprise.  The court’s order also appoints a receiver and imposes other emergency relief.

The SEC’s complaint alleges violations of Sections 5(a), 5©, and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.  The complaint seeks disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus interest, penalties, and permanent injunctions.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, is being conducted by Ana P. Doncic, Delia L. Helpingstine, and Sruthi Koneru of the Utah office.  The case is being supervised by Steven L. Klawans, and the litigation is being led by Jonathan S. Polish.


The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that it has adopted amendments to increase the amount of money companies can raise through crowdfunding to adjust for inflation.  It also approved amendments that adjust for inflation a threshold used to determine eligibility for benefits offered to “emerging growth companies” (EGCs) under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act.

“Regular updates to the JOBS Act, as prescribed by Congress, ensure that the entrepreneurs and investors who benefit from crowdfunding will continue to do so,” said SEC Acting Chairman Michael S. Piwowar. “Under these amendments, the JOBS Act can continue to create jobs and investment opportunities for the general public.”

The SEC is required to make inflation adjustments to certain JOBS Act rules at least once every five years after it was enacted on April 5, 2012.  In addition to the inflation adjustments, the SEC adopted technical amendments to conform several rules and forms to amendments made to the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) by Title I of the JOBS Act.

The Commission approved the new thresholds March 31. They will become effective when they are published in the Federal Register.


Section 101 of the JOBS Act added new Securities Act Section 2(a)(19) and Exchange Act Section 3(a)(80) to define the term “emerging growth company” (“EGC”).  Pursuant to those sections, every five years the SEC is directed to index the annual gross revenue amount used to determine EGC status to inflation to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (“CPI-U”) published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (“BLS”).  To carry out this statutory directive, the SEC has adopted amendments to Securities Act Rule 405 and Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 to include a definition for EGC that reflects an inflation-adjusted annual gross revenue threshold.  The JOBS Act also added new Securities Act Section 4(a)(6), which provides an exemption from the registration requirements of Section 5 under the Securities Act for certain crowdfunding transactions.  In October 2015, the SEC promulgated Regulation Crowdfunding to implement that exemption.  Sections 4(a)(6) and 4A of the Securities Act set forth dollar amounts used in connection with the crowdfunding exemption, and Section 4A(h)(1) states that such dollar amounts shall be adjusted by the SEC not less frequently than once every five years to reflect the change in the CPI-U published by the BLS.  The SEC has adopted amendments to Rules 100 and 201(t) of Regulation Crowdfunding and Securities Act Form C to reflect the required inflation adjustments.

In addition, Sections 102 and 103 of the JOBS Act amended the Securities Act and the Exchange Act to provide several exemptions from a number of disclosure, shareholder voting, and other regulatory requirements for any issuer that qualifies as an EGC. The exemptions reduce the financial disclosures an EGC is required to provide in public offering registration statements and relieve an EGC from conducting advisory votes on executive compensation, as well as from a number of accounting and disclosure requirements.  The regulatory relief provided under Sections 102 and 103 of the JOBS Act was self-executing and became effective once the JOBS Act was signed into law.  The technical amendments that the SEC is adopting conform several rules and forms to reflect these JOBS Act statutory changes.

Free Initial Consultation with a Securities Lawyer

When you need help with an SEC or Securities matter, call Ascent Law for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171927309554

Child Support and Parental Relocation

Everyone’s life is prone to change, and sometimes these changes require parental relocation after a divorce. Whether you are the primary custodial parent and wish to relocate with your children, or you are the parent whose visitation schedule would be affected by the move, you should always speak with a family lawyer about your plans before you move or make a change, just to make sure you do it right. You don’t need more problems or stress in your life.

Child Support and Parental Relocation

In Utah, “parental relocation” is defined as one parent moving more than 150 miles from the other parent. When a parent wishes to relocate, he or she must inform the other parent of the intent at least 60 days prior to the proposed move. While the state cannot prevent you or your ex-spouse from relocating, it can prevent the parent with primary custody from taking the child or children along if the relocation is not in their best interests. Our attorneys will review all the facts of your case and build your argument either for or against the move. This is what we do.

Considerations For Granting Parental Relocation

If you are the parent hoping to relocate, our lawyers will demonstrate to the court that your reasons for doing so are valid, and that your actions aren’t simply resulting from spite. Parental relocation requests are frequently granted when the custodial parent:

  • Has a strong job offer outside of the home city or state
  • Seeks to increase proximity to a network of family members and friends
  • Looks to remove his or herself or the children from an abusive relationship
  • Shows that the child or children will be better off with the move
  • Otherwise proves that the relocation serves the child or children’s best interests

From drafting the notice of the intended move to representing you in the event that your ex challenges your move, we can work with you to ensure your best chance of a successful outcome.

If it is your ex who is proposing the move, we will work to ensure that your relationship with your child is respected and protected, and we will aggressively challenge the relocation on your behalf.

Answering Common Questions About Child Support

We are here to address your legal concerns about child support in Utah. Read on to discover the answers to some of the more common questions we hear the most:

  • Does joint legal custody affect my financial obligations? Child support laws indicate that, because both parents have the authority to make decisions on their children’s behalf, joint legal custody does not impact financial obligations. However, joint physical custody is a different issue. Child support is based on these factors: physical custody, parenting time and income.
  • Can I modify child support payments? Once the court makes a decision, you are obligated to the amount ordered. There are certain scenarios, however, in which you may be eligible to reduce or terminate child support. These include:
    • Changes to your child’s residence, custody and parenting time
    • Illness or disability
    • Loss of your job
    • Permanent reduction in income
  • Am I still obligated to pay if my ex keeps me from my children? Because custody and visitation are separate legal matters, unfortunately, you are still expected to pay the amount ordered. If your ex is keeping you from your children and you have custody or visitation privileges, we can petition the court to enforce those rights. Even when it seems unjust, failing to make your child support payments could put you at risk of facing serious penalties.
  • What if my ex does not pay? Thanks to the Child Support Enforcement Act of 1984, you can seek legal help in collecting payments from an ex who does not honor his or her court order. We can file contempt charges, and the court may impose consequences such as garnishing wages, seizing property, withholding tax returns, revoking your ex’s driver’s license or jail time.
  • What if my ex moves out of state? Because of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, court orders remain in effect regardless of a parent’s physical location. There are several measures available to ensure child support enforcement, even if your ex moves out of Utah and refuses to pay.

Free Consultation with Divorce Lawyer in Utah

If you have a question about divorce law or if you need to start or defend against a divorce case in Utah call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will fight for you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171917480399

Government Liability and Immunity in Utah

In its infancy, the United States had sovereign immunity for federal and state governments and their employees. It wasn’t until the mid-1900s that a trend developed that held the government accountable for any cases, including wrongful death or other legal actions.

Today the State Tort Claims Act provides a waiver of immunity with expectations that apply to certain claims against the government. This probably seems like a mouthful, but having the right lawyer on your side that knows government laws can help you with a case in Salt Lake City, Utah or elsewhere. Because I’m a West Jordan injury lawyer, I’ve seen all sorts of injuries and accidents and ones against the State of Utah can be difficult.

Government Liability and Immunity in Utah

State Claims Act

This act limits immunity to the state, and sets up a procedure for claims against the state. The board or commission will determine whether the claims are valid, and may also limit damages for certain liability. At least 33 state acts — including Utah’s — limit the damages that are recovered from judgments against the state. This is why it’s important for residents of Salt Lake City to have a lawyer that knows what actions to pursue against the state. If you plan to pursue a claim against the state, there are certain facts and assertions that need to be sent in. The government then has 60 days to inform the claimant if the claim has been approved or denied.

If immunity is waived against the government, then the department or entity will be considered as if it were a private person. This would be the case if a wrongful death occurred on government property, but again this can be a tough call against the government. According to Utah Code Ann. 63-30d-301 (5)(a), “immunity is not waived if the injury resulted from an exercise of discretionary function.” This case would determine whether a lawyer could successfully sue the Salt Lake City or Utah government for negligent acts.

There are different parts of the government that function outside the Act, including 911 emergency medical services, government volunteers and hazardous materials. All of these could lead to a wrongful death case, in which you might require a wrongful death lawyer.

Make sure you hire a lawyer that knows the law well, and what they can do to help your case against government officials in Salt Lake City or elsewhere throughout the state of Utah.


There are many great reasons to ride bikes. Bicycling saves money and helps preserve your health and the environment. If you are going to ride your bike to celebrate National Bike Month, make sure you and your children wear a helmet. Many people think helmets are just for children, but most cyclist casualties are adults (88 percent) as opposed to children (12 percent). In 2014, 21,827 cyclists were injured in reported accidents. This can often be grounds for an auto accident lawsuit. Consider speaking to a lawyer today if you are a victim.

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, each year two percent of car accident crash deaths are cyclists. Driver/rider error is the most frequent reason for car accidents with cyclists involving 73% of cases. The most serious injuries are to the head and neck. Helmet use has been estimated to reduce the odds of head injury by 50 percent, and the odds of head, face, or neck injury by 33 percent.

Although the accident might not be your fault, getting hit by a car will always be worse for the cyclist than the vehicle. Just this last month, a cyclist was killed in a hit-and-run accident in West Valley City. This death could have been prevented if the driver would have been paying attention and seen the victim. There are some things that you can do to make your chances being seen and avoiding a car accident less likely. In the unlikely event that you are involved in an accident, make sure you see an attorney or a lawyer for help.

The first is to get a headlight. If you are going to ride at night, you drastically reduce your likelihood of being involved in an auto accident when you use a headlight.

The next step is to wave or make eye contact with the drivers. Being noticed is one of the best ways you can avoid an accident.

Finally, slow down. It may be inconvenient, but it is better than getting hit. Slowing your speed allows you to have more time to stop if the driver does not see you.

Enjoy the fresh air this May and join in the celebration of National Bike Month. Just remember to take precautions and if something happens to you, seek a lawyer that can fight to get you the care you need.

Free Initial Consultation with an accident and injury Lawyer

When you need legal help, call Ascent Law for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Michael R. Anderson, JD

Ascent Law LLC
8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C
West Jordan, Utah
84088 United States

Telephone: (801) 676-5506

from Best Utah Attorneys https://bestutahattorneys.tumblr.com/post/171893890864