Can Utah courts amend pleadings after final judgment? National Advertising Company v. Murray City Corporation Explained

The Utah Court of Appeals recently clarified important procedural requirements for amending pleadings after final judgment in National Advertising Company v. Murray City Corporation. This decision highlights critical timing requirements that practitioners must observe when seeking to modify claims after judgment has been entered.

Background and Facts

National Advertising Company (NAC) had a lease with the Crawfords for outdoor advertising signage. After multiple appeals regarding sign permit validity, the case was remanded to the trial court. Eleven days after remittitur, the Crawfords filed a motion for leave to amend their answer and add a counterclaim for breach of contract damages. The trial court granted the motion and entered judgment for $109,632.91 in favor of the Crawfords.

Key Legal Issues

The primary issue was whether the trial court had jurisdiction to grant the Crawfords’ motion for leave to amend after final judgment without first reopening the judgment under Rules 59(e) or 60(b). A secondary issue was whether the pending appeal tolled the filing deadlines for such motions.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court of appeals applied the established rule that “upon occurrence of a final adjudication, and thereafter, a [party] may not file an amended complaint. [Instead, the party] must move under [r]ules 59(e) or 60(b) to reopen the judgment.” The court found that while trial courts have discretionary power to treat motions to amend as simultaneous Rule 59(e) or 60(b) motions, they are not obligated to do so. Here, the trial court gave no indication it considered the motion as seeking to reopen judgment.

Critically, the court held that pending appeals do not toll the filing deadlines for Rules 59(e) or 60(b) motions. The Crawfords’ motion was filed over a year after the August 2, 2002 judgment, making it untimely under both rules.

Practice Implications

This decision reinforces that practitioners must strictly observe post-judgment procedural requirements. Rule 59(e) motions must be filed within 10 days of judgment entry, while Rule 60(b) motions for mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect, or newly discovered evidence must be filed within 3 months. The filing of an appeal does not pause these deadlines. Practitioners should consider filing Rule 60(b) motions during pending appeals when appropriate, as trial courts retain jurisdiction to consider such motions under the Baker v. Western Surety rule.