Opinion
Case No. 20060617-CA.
Filed October 5, 2006. (Not For Official Publication).
Appeal from the Third District, Salt Lake Department, 050919845 The Honorable Tyrone E. Medley.
Michael Brian Whiteman, Salt Lake City, Appellant Pro Se.
Mark L. Shurtleff and Nancy L. Kemp, Salt Lake City, for Appellees.
Before Judges Billings, McHugh, and Orme.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Michael Brian Whiteman appeals the trial court's dismissal of his complaint. This is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition based on the lack of a substantial question for review. See Utah R. App. P. 10(e).
Whiteman's docketing statement listed conclusory statements that were essentially the same assertions made before the trial court. However, Whiteman failed to present any legal issue for review or identify any trial court error in the ruling. Whiteman's response to the motion for summary disposition did not correct the deficiency. His response, too, contains only conclusory statements. Whiteman has not identified a legal issue nor has he presented any legal argument warranting further consideration by this court. In sum, "it plainly appears that no substantial question [for review] is presented." Utah R. App. P. 10(e).
Accordingly, the dismissal of Whiteman's complaint is affirmed.
Judith M. Billings, Judge, Carolyn B. McHugh, Judge, Gregory K. Orme, Judge, concur.