Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

M.K. v. Doyle

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided July 3, 2014No. 20120897-CAPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDavis, Judge

12 I agree with the majority that M.K.'s ongoing relationship with Doyle did not preclude her from obtaining a civil stalking injunction against him. However, I disagree with the majority's characterization of the trial court's comments regarding "Axis I disorder" as a mere credibility determination.

13 In weighing the evidence before it, the trial court took judicial notice of an "Axis I disorder that battered women tend to have where they ... tend to stay with batterers." By using this fact as a basis for disregarding evidence that . M.K. had "continued contact" with Doyle after he abused…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. JohnUtah Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Allied Construction & Development, Inc. v. Labor Commission Appeals BoardCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013
  3. Brown v. Sandy City Appeal BoardCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API