Utah Third District Court · No. 220900591
Robinson v. Winder Newton (third-party claims against Sylvia Miera-Fisk)
Not reached UPEPA
- Forum
- Utah Third District Court
- Case number
- No. 220900591
- Motion decided
- Apr 17, 2024
- Outcome
- Not reached
- Underlying case
- A council member being sued for defamation brought third-party claims against a citizens-committee member who had questioned her conduct.
- Relief
- Dismissed without prejudice on procedural grounds
- Conduct at issue
- A citizens committee member emailed an elected official and the county district attorney about the DA's representation of her
- Underlying claims
- Defamation and false light, brought as third-party claims
What the court held
- Winder Newton should not have brought Miera-Fisk into the case at all. A defendant can use a third-party complaint to bring in someone who may owe them for the claims already against them, not someone the defendant has a separate quarrel with.
- The judge also refused to add her as a party the other way, by joining her to the case. What she was accused of happened years after the events the lawsuit was about, and had little to do with them.
- The claims against her were dismissed without prejudice. The judge remarked that Winder Newton's claim against Miera-Fisk was “unseemly” for a public official and seemed to acknowledge it constituted a SLAPP suit. He nevertheless declined to rule on the special motion.
- Miera-Fisk had asked for more than dismissal. She asked the judge to decide her special motion, throw the claims out for good, and order Winder Newton to pay her attorney fees. The judge declined to decide the motion, saying nothing in the act requires a ruling on the merits of claims that were never properly in the case.
- That left her with no fees. Dismissal for good and a fee award both depend on winning the special motion, and the judge never reached it.
9:31 a.m.34 min
Appearances, then argument on whether Miera-Fisk could be brought into the case at all, and whether the judge had to rule on her special motion either way.
Download 10:05 a.m.32 min
Argument on the freeze the act puts on a case, and on whether a defendant who wins dismissal on other grounds can still recover fees.
Download Nov 27, 2023Counterclaim plaintiff
The lawsuitAnswer, counterclaim and third-party complaint (part 1 of 2)
PDF Nov 27, 2023Counterclaim plaintiff
The lawsuitAnswer, counterclaim and third-party complaint (part 2 of 2)
PDF Mar 22, 2024Counterclaim plaintiff
OppositionMemorandum opposing the special motion for expedited relief
PDF Mar 29, 2024Third-party defendant
Reply in supportReply memorandum supporting the special motion for expedited relief
PDF Other UPEPA matters
BAM Franchising v. Schneider
Brunette v. Engemann and Jeff Jenkins Productions
Tanner v. Deininger
The Preserve v. Kamas City
Not legal advice. Deadlines in your case may differ. Talk to a lawyer.