Laub v. SOUTH CENTRAL UTAH TELEPHONE ASS'N

I concur in affirming the denial of attorney fees and costs to plaintiffs. However, I dissent from that part of the Court’s opinion which reverses the trial court’s modification of the judgment against South Central.

The very purpose of the Utah Automobile No-Fault Insurance Act1 is to prevent double payment for the same loss and thus to avoid increased costs of insurance coverage.2 In furtherance of that worthy objective, the trial court appropriately modified the judgment against South Central by the specific, identifiable and undisputed amount of the PIP benefits received by plaintiffs…