Attorney Justin D Heideman's Legal Cases

Construction and development

R4 Constructors v. Inbalance Yoga

Dec 24, 2020

OUTCOME: Victory in favor of Heideman & Associates client - trial verdict was reversed and remanded

Heideman & Associates was hired to file and prosecute an appeal of a verdict against our client InBalance Yoga, Corp. We were successful in obtaining a reversal of the judgment as well as the award of ... attorney's fees. Specifically, the court held that the nonrecovery provision of Utah Code § 58-55-604 (which limits a non-licensed contractor’s ability to sue) 1) creates an affirmative obligation whereby the contractor must plead and prove his contractor status; which obligation is not a waivable affirmative defense; and 2) allows unlicensed contractors to sue if they are out of compliance with the statute; but only if they can demonstrate the common-law exception to the statute applies.

Contracts and agreements

Tronson v. Eagar

Dec 27, 2019

OUTCOME: Verdict in favor of Heideman & Associates client was affirmed.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the verdict of the trial court in favor of Heideman & Associates client; Ted Tronson. Specifically, the court found that there was neither plain error committed nor rever ... sible error, in the trials court's decision to issue a judgment in favor of our client.

Contracts and agreements

KTM Health Care Inc. vs. SG Nursing Home, LLC, et al.

Dec 04, 2018

OUTCOME: Victory for Heideman & Associates client KTM

Our client KTM entered into an exclusive services contract with Kolob Home Healthcare. Kolob used the contract to leverage a new agreement with their current provider without informing our client. Ou ... r client relying on the agreement moved forward to prepare for performance. When Kolob's conduct was discovered KTM brought suit. At trial, the Jury found Kolob liable for the damages KTM incurred. A verdict was issued in favor of KTM. Kolob then appealed. The Court of appeals affirmed that damage award against Kolob and collections have progressed. It has been discovered that Kolob has sold its facility to a new entity. Heideman & Associates is seeking to enforce the judgment and collect against all those involved.

Construction and development

Z-Pact, LLC, Terry Zimmerman, C. Price Zimmerman v. Dockstader Holdings, Inc.

Jan 01, 2018

OUTCOME: Verdict in favor of Heideman & Associates Clients.

Heideman & Associates (H&A) clients, Terry & Price Zimmerman, engaged H&A to file suit against contractors that had failed to construct their dream home in an appropriate fashion. Prior to trial multi ... ple subcontractors settled with the Zimmermans as a direct result of H&A's efforts. The general contractor, and primary defendant, took the matter to trial. At trial, the Court found in favor of the Zimmerman's and awarded them damages.

Appeals

Pierucci v. Pierucci

Jul 10, 2014

OUTCOME: Reversal of Trial Court's Dismissal

A Fraudulent deed was deemed to have tolled the statute of limitations. The reversal reinstated our client's claims and we will proceed.

Construction and development

Hone v. Advanced Shoring

Nov 23, 2012

OUTCOME: Verdict for Plaintiff

2012 UT App 327: Successfully tried and then defended on appeal a piering defects case and warranty claim

Contracts and agreements

Davis v. Goldsworth

Apr 24, 2008

OUTCOME: Reversed and remanded for further proceedings

2008 UT App 145: Successfully obtained a reversal of the Trial Court. Identified the trial Court's failure to follow proper legal procedure.

Real estate

Davis v. Goldsworthy

Apr 24, 2008

OUTCOME: Victory in favor of Heideman and Associates client - trial court was reversed and the matter remanded.

The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's error. The trial court set aside a default judgment on the basis that service had not been properly performed. The Court of Appeals reversed this decis ... ion affirming that the service had fully complied with Rule 5 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.

Government

City of Leeds v. Prisbrey

Feb 12, 2008

OUTCOME: Verdict in favor of Mr. Prisbrey

179 P.3d 757 (2008): I was trial counsel for this matter. At trial, we were unsuccessful. However, my firm took the matter on appeal to the Utah Supreme Court. When that occurred, the Supreme Court ... reversed the trial court with instructions to enter a verdict in favor of my client. The Public Roads doctrine in Utah was clarified, and my client was successful

Real estate

Argyle v. Jones

Aug 11, 2005

OUTCOME: My client lost at trial but won on appeal

Reversal of Trial Court Error regarding the use and meaning of Utah's Boundary by Acquiescence doctrine

Justin D Heideman's Legal Cases (11)

R4 Constructors v. Inbalance Yoga

Tronson v. Eagar

KTM Health Care Inc. vs. SG Nursing Home, LLC, et al.

Z-Pact, LLC, Terry Zimmerman, C. Price Zimmerman v. Dockstader Holdings, Inc.

Pierucci v. Pierucci

Hone v. Advanced Shoring

Davis v. Goldsworth

Davis v. Goldsworthy

City of Leeds v. Prisbrey

Argyle v. Jones