Court analyzes non-compete enforcement and forfeiture implications for employee contracts

Council members criticized the HostDime data‑center developer for missed deadlines and discussed pursuing Amendment 3 to increase liquidated damages; the town attorney said a voluntary amendment would be needed to raise penalties and legal remedies remain if negotiations fail.

Commissioners asked for stronger enforcement language and a reasonable bond amount in a road-use agreement connected to a Mainstream Fiber project after discussing past subcontractor performance; counsel said breach of contract and fee bond would be the primary remedies and staff will finalize language.

Airport official reported the apron milling and subgrade work is complete and asphalt is pending a short cure; the project is within days of contract time and the board noted potential $1,000-per‑day liquidated damages if the contractor misses the deadline.

City staff told the council the Plum Creek developer failed to deliver promised homes and has delinquent taxes; the council authorized the city manager to prepare and send notices of breach under the RHID and MIH agreements, starting contract cure timelines required by those agreements.

A longtime resident provided photographs and accused the city's tree‑trimming contractor of failing to use required wood‑chipper safety devices; the city attorney and council discussed whether the city bears responsibility for contractor compliance and noted the council may inform contractors about municipal code requirements.

An appellate panel heard argument over whether a trial court erred in denying a motion to compel arbitration after finding a settlement induced by fraud. Appellants said arbitrability of contract-wide challenges belongs to an arbitrator; plaintiffs urged affirmance, citing a judge's fraud finding and late-produced documents.

Administrator Hill announces contract enforcement and upcoming meeting regarding service disruptions.

In the Desjardins appeal, appellant counsel argued pre‑execution misrepresentations and later nonperformance by the husband rendered the prenuptial agreement unfair; appellee counsel said the parties negotiated with counsel and trial findings satisfied DiMaggio’s first‑ and second‑look fairness tests.

Court examines Daniel Kanter's request to be released from his lease obligations.

Board members debated holding the contractor to $576,000 in liquidated damages and instead voted to approve a proposed settlement; the board voted 5–2 to accept the settlement amount presented in executive session.

After a BYU/Internet Safety Labs review flagged that many education apps collect and share data beyond contract terms, the committee approved a bill that would require remediation within 30 days or allow LEAs to cancel contracts without recourse; two members opposed the measure, noting existing law.

Judge Moratzik rules alimony provisions in couple's contract are unenforceable due to vagueness

Court reviews contract law impacting spousal support provisions in Mark Taylor's appeal