Rule 46 - Considerations Governing Review of Certiorari(a) Review by a writ of certiorari is not a matter of right, but of judicial discretion, and will be granted only for special and important reasons. The primary consideration is whether a decision on the question presented is likely to have significant precedential value. The possibility of an error in the Court of Appeals' or another tribunal's decision, without more, ordinarily will not justify review. The following, while neither controlling nor wholly measuring the Supreme Court's discretion, indicate the character of reasons that typically will be considered: (1) The petition presents a question regarding the proper interpretation of, or ambiguity in, a constitutional provision, statute or rule that is likely to affect future cases;(2) The petition presents a legal question of first impression in Utah that is likely to recur in future cases;(3) The petition provides an opportunity to resolve confusion or inconsistency in a legal standard set forth in a decision of the Court of Appeals, or in a prior decision of the Supreme Court, that is likely to affect future cases; or(4) The petition challenges a decision of the Court of Appeals with regard 29 to a legal issue that has not been addressed by the Supreme Court and that is likely to recur in future cases. (b) After a petition for certiorari has been filed, the panel that issued the opinion of the Court of Appeals may issue a minute entry recommending that the Supreme Court grant the petition. Parties shall not request such a recommendation by motion or otherwise.Amended January 24, 2019 and February 28, 2019, effective 11/1/2019.