For decades Utah was one of a handful of states where a spouse could sue the person their husband or wife had an affair with. The claim was called alienation of affection, and while it was rarely filed and even more rarely won, it was real, it was occasionally used as leverage in divorce negotiations, and it generated a steady stream of questions to firms like ours. That era is ending. In the 2026 General Session the Legislature passed Senate Bill 109, Alienation of Affection Amendments, which was signed by the Governor on March 23, 2026. The bill adds a single operative sentence to the Utah Code: there is no right of action for alienation of affections. Here is what the claim was, what the new law does, and what a wronged spouse can still do.
What alienation of affection was
Alienation of affection was a civil tort, a lawsuit for money damages, brought by one spouse against a third party who intentionally interfered with the marriage. Historically that meant the affair partner, though the claim could in theory reach a meddling in-law or anyone else who set out to destroy the marital relationship. Most states abolished it during the twentieth century, either by statute or by court decision, on the theory that it treated spouses like property and turned divorces into revenge litigation. Utah kept it. In 2001 the Utah Supreme Court, in Heiner v. Simpson, declined an invitation to abolish the claim and left the question to the Legislature.
To win, a plaintiff had to prove that a genuine marital relationship existed, that the defendant intentionally and wrongfully interfered with it, and that the interference was the cause of the loss of affection. The claim was also subject to a short statute of limitations, so timing mattered. Damages could include the loss of the spouse’s companionship and support and, in egregious cases, punitive damages.
Why it was so hard to win
In practice these cases rarely succeeded, and the reasons are instructive. Affairs almost never happen in marriages that were fine before. The defendant’s answer was nearly always that the marriage was already over in every way but paperwork, and that argument usually landed. Proving that a specific person caused the loss of affection, as opposed to the spouse’s own choices, required evidence the plaintiff rarely had. Juries were unsympathetic to a plaintiff who seemed motivated by revenge. And the cost of litigating, including depositions of both spouses and the affair partner about the most private details of their lives, exceeded any realistic recovery in most cases.
What the claim did have was leverage value. The threat of a lawsuit against a new partner sometimes moved settlement negotiations in a divorce. That, more than any successful verdict, is what kept it alive.
What SB 109 does
The bill creates a new part of the Judicial Code, Utah Code 78B-3-1302, with the operative language: there is no right of action for alienation of affections. Under the enrolled bill, the change takes effect on May 5, 2027. After that date no alienation of affection claim can be brought in Utah courts.
The bill does not say what happens to claims that accrued before the effective date, or to cases already on file. Our reading is that a claim based on conduct before the effective date, filed before the effective date, should proceed under the old law, and that the delayed effective date exists to give people in that position time to file. Anyone who believes they have a claim should talk to an attorney well before May 2027, and should not assume that a claim filed afterward will survive. If you are relying on this deadline, verify it against the current statute at the time, because effective dates and transition rules can be amended.
What a wronged spouse can still do
The abolition of the tort does not mean Utah law is indifferent to infidelity. It means the response happens inside the divorce rather than in a separate lawsuit against a third party.
Alimony. Utah’s alimony statute allows the court to consider fault, and fault is defined to include engaging in sexual relations with someone other than the spouse during the marriage where that conduct substantially contributed to the breakup. A court may reduce or deny alimony to the spouse who had the affair. Our article on whether Utah is an at-fault state explains the details.
Dissipation. Money spent on an affair, including gifts, trips, hotels, and support of a new partner, can be treated as dissipated marital property and charged against the unfaithful spouse’s share in the property division. This requires records, so gather bank and card statements early.
Custody. An affair by itself is not a custody factor, but exposing the children to a new partner during the marriage, or a new partner who presents a safety concern, can be.
Divorce grounds. Adultery remains a fault ground for divorce under Utah Code 81-4-405 for spouses who want it in the decree, though nearly everyone files on irreconcilable differences.
What is gone is the ability to make the affair partner a defendant. The person who interfered with your marriage will not be paying damages for it, and a threat to sue them is no longer a bargaining chip.
If you are the person being threatened
If a spouse or ex-spouse has threatened to sue you for alienation of affection, the threat is weaker every day and will be empty after the effective date. Do not pay anything, sign anything, or agree to anything on the strength of it without talking to a lawyer. Claims filed before the deadline still have to meet the old elements, which most cannot.
Our older articles
CoilLaw has written about alienation of affection for years, and those articles describe the law as it stood before SB 109. We have left them in place with a note pointing here, because the elements and history are still relevant to any claim filed before the effective date.
CoilLaw handles divorce, alimony, and property division throughout Utah. If infidelity is part of your case, we can tell you how it will actually affect the outcome, and it is not through a lawsuit against a third party anymore.
This article is general information about Utah law, not legal advice for your situation.
