Colosimo v Gateway Community Church

Colosimo sought review of the court of Appels decision affirming summary judgment to church on their wrongful death claim. The Court affirmed. It held church owed no common law duty to Colosimo’s son as he was trespassing on the roof, there was no evidence of trespassers constantly going onto the roof as two incidents over 12 years is insufficient to prove regular or persistent trespassing, that the court of apples erred ion a child trespass theory by requiring actual knowledge of trespass, but that error was not a  ground to reverse as there was no evidence Church knew the defectively installed sign that electrified part of the roof had electrified the roof, and held the district court properly placed the burden of proof on Colosimo at summary judgment on the common law duty issue though the court of Appeals appears to have placed the burden on Church. It held Church owed no duty to son under the local sign ordinance because the plain language shows the purpose of the ordinance was protecting the public at large not trespassers.

Jensen v Intermountain Healthcare, Inc.

Intermountain brought an interlocutory appeal of the district court decision that Jensen’s case was not time barred. The Court affirmed. It held that four year period to bring a medical malpractice suit in Utah Code 78B-3-404(1) is a statute of repose as it is triggered by the alleged act of malpractice not its discovery. It held the tolling provisions in 78B-3-616(3)(a) applied here as the term “applicable statute of limitations” is ambiguous as the legislature sometimes uses that phrase to mean limitations statutes and sometimes uses it to mean limitation and repose statutes and is best read to allow tolling when mandatory pre-litigation process is happening as 404 is in the part of code titled “Statute of Limitations” and thus it is reasonable to conclude the legislature intended the repose period to be tolled and this also serves to make the entire medial malpractice system work harmoniously.