Opinion
Case No. 20020240-CA.
Filed July 17, 2003. (Not For Official Publication)
Appeal from the Fourth District, Provo Department, The Honorable Douglas L. Cornaby.
Holli Lundahl, Orem, Appellant Pro Se.
Mark L. Shurtleff, Brent A. Burnett, and Joni Jones, Salt Lake City, for Appellees.
Before Judges Jackson, Bench, and Orme.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Holli Lundahl appeals the dismissal of her case against former Fourth District Judge Ray Harding Jr. and Deputy Court Clerk Mike Tronier.
This is the second lawsuit filed by Lundahl against Harding as the assigned judge in case No. 990402021 in the Fourth District Court. We affirmed the dismissal of the first suit on grounds of judicial immunity. See Lundahl v. Harding, 2001 UT App 142. Claims against Judge Harding pertaining to case No. 990402021 are barred by the claim preclusion prong of res judicata. "Claim preclusion prevents parties . . . from relitigating `a claim for relief that was once litigated on the merits and resulted in a final judgment. . . .'" Salt Lake City v. Silver Fork Pipeline Co., 913 P.2d 731, 733 (Utah 1995) (citations omitted). Claim preclusion applies where "(i) both cases . . . involve the same parties, their privies or assigns; (ii) the claim sought to be barred either [was] presented or [was] available to be presented in the first case; and (iii) the first suit . . . resulted in a final judgment on the merits." Murdock v. Springville Mun. Corp., 1999 UT 39, ¶ 16, 982 P.2d 65. The district court correctly dismissed the second suit against Harding based upon claim preclusion to the extent it asserts claims regarding his actions in case no. 990402021.
The district court also correctly dismissed claims against Deputy Clerk Mike Tronier with regard to case no. 990402021 based upon judicial immunity. Harding was functioning in his judicial capacity, and Tronier, as his clerk, was integrally involved in the judicial process and is also entitled to immunity. See Parker v. Dodgion, 971 P.2d 496, 498 (Utah 1998) (stating immunity extended to persons performing functions essential to judicial decision making); Ambus v. Utah State Bd. of Educ., 858 P.2d 1372, 1380 (Utah 1993) (stating court clerks subject to absolute immunity when performing duties integral to judicial process).
Claims added in Lundahl's first amended complaint alleged that Harding and Tronier conspired to alter documents and manipulate a separate case pending before Judge Fred Howard. These claims were not encompassed in Lundahl's original notice of claim dated April 24, 2000. Lundahl's second notice of claim, dated August 8, 2001, was dated almost four months after filing of the original complaint in this case. It encompassed claims asserted in the first amended complaint, which was filed on October 5, 2001, less than ninety days after the date of the second notice of claim.
Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-14 (1997) allows a governmental entity ninety days in which to approve or deny a claim or allow it to be deemed denied by the entity's failure to act. A lawsuit filed before expiration of that ninety-day period must be dismissed. See Hall v. State, 2001 UT 34, ¶ 26, 24 P.2d 958 (holding district court properly dismissed suit filed before expiration of ninety-day period as failing to comply with notice of claim requirement). The district court did not rely on this ground in its dismissal; nevertheless, the additional claims included in the first amended complaint could not be considered because they were not encompassed in the original notice of claim and were prematurely filed after the date of the second notice of claim.
We affirm the dismissal of Lundahl's complaint in its entirety.
Norman H. Jackson, Presiding Judge, Russell W. Bench, Judge, and Gregory K. Orme, Judge, concur.