Endow v. UTA

Summary

The Utah Supreme Court revokes its acceptance of a certified question concerning whether the Utah Antidiscrimination Act provides for individual liability. The court identifies substantial uncertainty regarding the federal district court’s jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s UADA claims, including potential statutory-bar and administrative-exhaustion issues. Because an opinion could be advisory, the court concludes that answering the certified question would be an improper exercise of judicial power.

Holdings

1. The Utah Supreme Court revoked its acceptance of the certified question as improvident because unresolved questions concerning the federal district court's jurisdiction created a substantial possibility that an answer would be advisory.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Utah Supreme Court should answer the certified question regarding individual liability under the Utah Antidiscrimination Act when unresolved jurisdictional issues might deprive the federal district court of subject matter jurisdiction over the UADA claims.
2. Whether issuing an answer to a certified question that may not resolve a live federal case would constitute an improper advisory opinion.

Disposition

other