Baum v. Hayes, 2010 UT App 379 (Utah Court of Appeals December 23, 2010).
The Court of appeals previously remanded this case for lack of findings. On remand, the trial court made supplemental findings and changed the award. Husband appealed and argued that the trial court should not have changed the award, but instead should have only made findings that supported the prior award.
The Court of Appeals disagreed, and stated that the trial Court should amend the award according to the evidence and if the findings require the award to be changed it should be changed accordingly.
Husband also appealed the presentation and admittance of certain evidence. The Court of appeals did not consider this appeal for three reasons first, the trial court stated that it did not consider the evidence; second, Husband failed to preserve his grounds because he never objected to the evidence at the trial level; and third, Husband failed to marshal the evidence in regards to the evidence. Affirmed.
Posts
