Title 78B - Judicial Code - Chapter 7 - Protective Orders (Superseded 7/1/2020) - Part 4 - Dating Violence Protection Act (Superseded 7/1/2020) - Section 409 - Mutual dating violence protective orders. (Effective 7/1/2020)


Published: 2020-07-01

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.

Utah Code

Page 1

Effective 7/1/2020 Superseded 9/1/2021 78B-7-409 Mutual dating violence protective orders. (1) A court may not grant a mutual order or mutual dating violence protective orders to opposing

parties, unless each party: (a) files an independent petition against the other for a dating violence protective order, and both

petitions are served; (b) makes a showing at a due process dating violence protective order hearing of abuse or dating

violence committed by the other party; and (c) demonstrates the abuse or dating violence did not occur in self-defense.

(2) If the court issues mutual dating violence protective orders, the court shall include specific findings of all elements of Subsection (1) in the court order justifying the entry of the court order.

(3) (a) Except as provided in Subsection (3)(b), a court may not grant a protective order to a civil

petitioner who is the respondent or defendant subject to: (i) a civil protective order that is issued under:

(A) this part; (B)Part 2, Child Protective Orders; (C)Part 6, Cohabitant Abuse Protective Orders; (D)Part 8, Criminal Protective Orders; or (E)Title 78A, Chapter 6, Juvenile Court Act;

(ii) an ex parte civil protective order issued under Part 2, Child Protective Orders; or (iii) a foreign protection order enforceable under Part 3, Uniform Interstate Enforcement of

Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act. (b) The court may issue a protective order to a civil petitioner described in Subsection (3)(a) if:

(i) the court determines that the requirements of Subsection (1) are met; and (ii)

(A) the same court issued the protective order against the respondent; or (B) the subsequent court determines it would be impractical for the original court to consider

the matter or confers with the court that issued the protective order described in Subsection (3)(a)(i) or (ii).