Can a motion to reconsider extend the time for appeal in Utah? Bonneville Billing v. Torres Explained

The Utah Court of Appeals in Bonneville Billing v. Torres clarified that motions to reconsider cannot extend appeal deadlines when filed after proper post-judgment motion periods have expired.

Background and Facts

Bonneville Billing obtained a default judgment but received less than the amount requested in its complaint. The trial court entered judgment on December 14, 1999. Nearly a month later, on January 24, 2000, Bonneville filed a “Motion to Reconsider.” The trial court denied this motion, and Bonneville appealed from that denial.

Key Legal Issues

The central issue was whether Bonneville could appeal from the denial of its motion to reconsider, and whether such a motion could extend the time for appeal under Rule 4(b) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court emphasized that Utah courts do not recognize motions to reconsider under the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure. While courts may construe such motions according to their substance as motions under Rule 59(e) (to alter or amend judgment) or Rule 52(b) (to amend findings), both rules require filing within ten days of judgment entry. Here, the ten-day period expired on December 28, 1999, but Bonneville did not file its motion until January 24, 2000. The court held that an untimely motion to reconsider cannot extend appeal time or revive expired appellate rights.

Practice Implications

This decision reinforces the critical importance of adhering to post-judgment motion deadlines. Practitioners must file any motion to alter judgment under Rule 59(e) or amend findings under Rule 52(b) within ten days of judgment entry. The court will not allow parties to circumvent these deadlines through improperly labeled motions to reconsider filed after the proper deadlines have passed.