Vigil v. Bigelow , 2012 UT App 91 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                           IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
    ‐‐‐‐ooOoo‐‐‐‐
    Jacob E. Vigil,                              )           PER CURIAM DECISION
    )
    Petitioner and Appellant,             )               Case No. 20111083‐CA
    )
    v.                                           )                    FILED
    )                 (March 29, 2012)
    Alfred Bigelow, Warden,                      )
    )                 
    2012 UT App 91
    Respondent and Appellee.              )
    ‐‐‐‐‐
    Third District, Salt Lake Department, 110918781
    The Honorable Joseph C. Fratto Jr.
    Attorneys:        Jacob E. Vigil, Draper, Appellant Pro Se
    ‐‐‐‐‐
    Before Judges McHugh, Davis, and Christiansen.
    ¶1     Jacob E. Vigil seeks to appeal the district court’s minute entry of November 16,
    2011, denying his motion for a temporary restraining order without prejudice. This
    matter is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition on the basis that
    the grounds for review are so insubstantial as not to merit further proceedings and
    consideration by the court. See Utah R. App. P. 10.
    ¶2      The district court’s jurisdiction is invoked by properly filing a civil complaint or
    petition for extraordinary relief. See Utah R. Civ. P. 3(b) (stating that “[t]he court shall
    have jurisdiction from the time of filing of the complaint or service of the summons and
    a copy of the complaint”); Mellor v. Cook, 
    587 P.2d 882
    , 884 (Utah 1979) (stating that
    prior to providing any injunctive relief, the jurisdiction of the court must be invoked by
    initiation of an action). Vigil did not file a complaint or a petition for extraordinary
    relief that would potentially invoke the district court’s jurisdiction. Instead, he merely
    filed a motion for a temporary restraining order unattached to any underlying case.
    This filing, by itself, was insufficient to invoke the district court’s jurisdiction.
    Accordingly, the district court properly denied the motion for a temporary restraining
    order as premature.
    ¶3    Affirmed.
    ____________________________________
    Carolyn B. McHugh,
    Presiding Judge
    ____________________________________
    James Z. Davis, Judge
    ____________________________________
    Michele M. Christiansen, Judge
    20111083‐CA                                2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20111083-CA

Citation Numbers: 2012 UT App 91

Filed Date: 3/29/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2021