Utah State Court Motion for Extension of Time

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Utah District Court

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS

1. Replace all bracketed placeholders with case-specific information.
2. Utah R. Civ. P. 7(l) requires a good-faith conferral certification before filing any motion. Complete the conferral requirement before drafting.
3. Utah e-filing is mandatory statewide through the MyCase system. File all documents electronically unless exempted.
4. Under URCP 6(b), motions filed before the deadline expires require a showing of "good cause." Motions filed after the deadline expires require a showing of "excusable neglect."
5. URCP 7(j) permits certain motions to be decided without oral argument. Include a request for hearing only if necessary.
6. Remove all instructional notes before filing.

CAPTION

IN THE [____] JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR [________________________________] COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Pursuant to Utah Rules of Civil Procedure 6(b) and 7, [________________________________] ("Movant") respectfully moves this Court for an order extending the deadline for [________________________________] from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____], and in support thereof states as follows:

I. RULE 7(l) CONFERRAL CERTIFICATION

Undersigned counsel certifies that, in compliance with Utah R. Civ. P. 7(l), on [__/__/____], counsel for Movant conferred in good faith with counsel for [________________________________] regarding this Motion. The result of the conferral is as follows:

☐ Opposing counsel does not oppose this Motion (stipulated/unopposed).

☐ Opposing counsel opposes this Motion. The basis for opposition, as stated by opposing counsel, is: [________________________________].

☐ Opposing counsel takes no position on this Motion.

☐ Despite good-faith efforts on [__/__/____] and [__/__/____], counsel for Movant was unable to confer with opposing counsel. Efforts included: [________________________________].

☐ Movant is self-represented and conferred directly with [________________________________] on [__/__/____].

II. IDENTIFICATION OF DEADLINE AT ISSUE

1. Current Deadline: [__/__/____]

2. Obligation Due: [________________________________]

3. Source of Deadline:

☐ Court Order dated [__/__/____]

☐ Scheduling Order dated [__/__/____]

☐ Rule-based deadline under Utah R. Civ. P. [____]

☐ Stipulation of the parties dated [__/__/____]

4. Proposed New Deadline: [__/__/____]

5. Length of Extension Requested: [____] days

6. Number of Prior Extensions Granted for This Obligation: [____]

III. TIMING OF THIS MOTION

☐ This Motion is filed before the expiration of the current deadline. Movant therefore seeks relief under Utah R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), which permits enlargement of time "for good cause" when the request is made before the original deadline expires.

☐ This Motion is filed after the expiration of the current deadline. Movant therefore seeks relief under Utah R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B), which permits enlargement of time upon a showing of "excusable neglect" when the request is made after the deadline has passed.

IV. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

1. This action was commenced on [__/__/____] and involves claims for [________________________________].

2. On [__/__/____], the Court entered [________________________________] (the "Order") establishing a deadline of [__/__/____] for [________________________________].

3. Since entry of the Order, Movant has diligently pursued compliance with the deadline, including the following specific steps: [________________________________].

4. Notwithstanding Movant's diligence, additional time is necessary because: [________________________________].

5. The current trial date is set for [__/__/____]. The requested extension will not affect the trial date or other deadlines in the Court's scheduling order.

6. [Additional relevant facts: ________________________________].

V. GROUNDS FOR EXTENSION

Movant asserts the following grounds in support of this Motion (select all that apply):

☐ Volume of discovery materials. Movant has received [____] pages of documents and/or [____] electronic files requiring review and analysis.

☐ Expert witness scheduling. Movant's retained expert, [________________________________], is not available until [__/__/____] due to [________________________________].

☐ Third-party records. Movant is awaiting records from [________________________________], which were subpoenaed on [__/__/____] and have not yet been produced.

☐ Complexity of legal issues. The legal issues presented require additional research and briefing time, including [________________________________].

☐ Settlement negotiations. The parties are engaged in active settlement discussions and an extension would facilitate resolution without further litigation expense.

☐ Attorney scheduling conflict. Undersigned counsel has a conflicting obligation in [________________________________], Case No. [________________________________], set for [__/__/____].

☐ Illness or emergency. [________________________________] experienced [________________________________] on [__/__/____], which prevented timely completion of [________________________________].

☐ Newly retained counsel. Movant retained new counsel on [__/__/____], and counsel requires additional time to become familiar with the case.

☐ Other: [________________________________].

VI. LEGAL STANDARD

A. Pre-Deadline Motions: Good Cause (URCP 6(b)(1)(A))

Under Utah R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), "[w]hen an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time" by rule or court order, "the court for good cause may extend the time ... if a request is made before the original time or its extension expires." The "good cause" standard requires a showing that the movant has acted diligently and that circumstances beyond the movant's control justify additional time. See Crossland Sav. v. Hatch, 877 P.2d 1241, 1243 (Utah 1994).

B. Post-Deadline Motions: Excusable Neglect (URCP 6(b)(1)(B))

Under Utah R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B), the court may permit an act to be done after the deadline has passed "if the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect." Utah courts apply a multi-factor analysis, considering: (1) the danger of prejudice to the non-moving party; (2) the length of the delay and its potential impact on judicial proceedings; (3) the reason for the delay, including whether it was within the reasonable control of the movant; and (4) whether the movant acted in good faith. See Bonneville Tower Condo. Mgmt. Comm. v. Thompson Michie Assocs., 728 P.2d 1017, 1020 (Utah 1986).

C. Motion Practice Requirements (URCP 7)

Utah R. Civ. P. 7(a) requires that all motions state "the relief requested and the grounds for the relief requested." Rule 7(d) requires that a memorandum supporting a motion include "a concise statement of the relevant facts" and "argument citing authority for the relief requested." This Motion complies with both requirements.

D. Exceptions

Under URCP 6(b)(2), the court may not extend the time for taking action under Rules 50(b) (renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law), 52(b) (amendment of findings), 59(b), (d), and (e) (new trial motions), and 60(c) (relief from judgment time limitation).

VII. ARGUMENT

A. Good Cause / Excusable Neglect Exists

[________________________________]

Movant has demonstrated diligence throughout this litigation. The need for additional time arises from [________________________________], which was not reasonably foreseeable at the time the original deadline was established. Movant promptly sought this extension upon learning of the circumstances necessitating it.

B. Movant Has Acted Diligently

Since the commencement of this action, Movant has consistently met all prior deadlines. The following specific steps demonstrate Movant's diligence:

1. [________________________________]
2. [________________________________]
3. [________________________________]

C. No Prejudice to Non-Moving Party

Granting this extension will not prejudice [________________________________] ("Non-Moving Party") because:

1. The trial date of [__/__/____] remains unaffected.
2. Non-Moving Party's own deadlines are not impacted.
3. Non-Moving Party has not identified any specific prejudice that would result from the extension.
4. [________________________________]

D. The Extension Promotes Resolution on the Merits

Utah R. Civ. P. 1 provides that the Rules "should be liberally construed and applied to achieve the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action." Granting a modest extension promotes adjudication on the merits rather than disposition on procedural technicalities.

VIII. IMPACT ON OTHER DEADLINES

☐ No other deadlines are affected by this extension.

☐ The following deadlines should be correspondingly adjusted:

IX. MITIGATION COMMITMENTS

Movant offers the following commitments to minimize the impact of the requested extension:

1. Movant will complete [________________________________] no later than the proposed new deadline of [__/__/____].
2. Movant will maintain all other existing deadlines, including the trial date of [__/__/____].
3. Movant will provide a status update to the Court and opposing counsel within [____] days of the new deadline if the obligation has not yet been completed.
4. [________________________________]

X. REQUESTED RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Movant respectfully requests that the Court:

1. Extend the deadline for [________________________________] from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____];
2. Adjust any related deadlines as set forth in Section VIII above; and
3. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

SIGNATURE BLOCK

DATED: [__/__/____]

[________________________________]
[________________________________] (Firm Name)
[________________________________] (Street Address)
[________________________________], Utah [____]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Facsimile: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

By: ________________________________________
[________________________________]
Utah Bar No. [________________________________]
Attorney for [________________________________]

PROPOSED ORDER

IN THE [____] JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR [________________________________] COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

The Court, having reviewed [________________________________]'s Motion for Extension of Time filed on [__/__/____], the conferral certification under Utah R. Civ. P. 7(l), and good cause appearing therefor, hereby ORDERS as follows:

1. The Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED.

2. The deadline for [________________________________] is hereby extended from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____].

3. ☐ All other deadlines remain in effect.

☐ The following deadlines are adjusted accordingly:

• [________________________________]: extended to [__/__/____]
• [________________________________]: extended to [__/__/____]

4. [________________________________]

DATED this [____] day of [________________________________], [____].

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________
Honorable [________________________________]
District Court Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME and PROPOSED ORDER to be filed with the Court and served upon all counsel of record and parties via the Utah Courts E-Filing System (MyCase) pursuant to Utah R. Civ. P. 5(b)(3)(A), which effectuates electronic service on all registered users.

Service was additionally made by the following method(s) upon the following parties:

________________________________________
[________________________________]

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 6(b) — Enlargement of Time: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/rules/view.php?type=urcp&rule=6
• Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 7 — Pleadings Allowed; Motions: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/rules/view.php?type=urcp&rule=7
• Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 5 — Service and Filing: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/rules/view.php?type=urcp&rule=5
• Utah Courts E-Filing System (MyCase): https://www.utcourts.gov/en/self-help/case-info/efiling.html
• Crossland Savings v. Hatch, 877 P.2d 1241 (Utah 1994) — Good cause standard for enlargement of time
• Bonneville Tower Condo. Mgmt. Comm. v. Thompson Michie Assocs., 728 P.2d 1017 (Utah 1986) — Excusable neglect analysis
• Utah Code Ann. § 78A-5-102 — District Court Jurisdiction