Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Arbitration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves higher arbitration cap for vehicle‑accident claims, tightens appeal rules
Summary
First substitute to SB105 raises arbitration jurisdiction from $25,000 to $50,000, adjusts discovery and imposes stiffer de novo appeal thresholds and cost‑shifting; the Senate advanced the substitute by roll call.
The Utah Senate on Feb. 22 approved the first substitute to Senate Bill 105, increasing the arbitration threshold for motor‑vehicle accident claims from $25,000 to $50,000 and tightening appeal procedures, supporters said.
Sponsor Senator Eckhart told colleagues the arbitration process established several years ago has reduced time and cost for smaller claims and that expanding the cap will bring more cases into the lower‑cost arbitration framework. The substitute shortens barriers to arbitration while adjusting de novo appeal provisions so district‑court trials are not used repeatedly to undo arbitration outcomes.
Key changes described on the floor include a requirement that a party taking a de novo appeal must improve its arbitration judgment by 30 percent to avoid fee shifting (down from a committee proposal of 35 percent), and a cost‑shifting cap increase in some circumstances (the floor discussion referenced raising the recoverable cost cap from $4,000 to $6,000). The substitute also alters discovery timelines on de novo appeal, providing an additional 90 days for discovery where appeals proceed to district court, and adjusts damages exposure tied to policy limits.
Senators questioned whether $6,000 in recoverable costs could be large relative to the claim sizes in the $50,000-or‑less band; sponsor Eckhart said the figure is below typical trial costs and intended to deter routine appeals. Supporters including Senator Valentine praised the expansion as preserving a lower‑cost dispute resolution model for the bulk of smaller cases.
The clerk reported a roll call on third reading: the first substitute of SB105 received 25 yea votes, 0 nay votes and 4 absent and was placed on the third‑reading calendar.
