Wolferts v. Wolferts, 2013 UT App 235 (October 3, 2013) 

The Utah Court of Appeals rejected a mother’s appeal from contempt sanctions because she had not preserved the issue for appeal, and the court refused to consider arguments of plain error and exceptional circumstance doctrine that the mother raised for the first time in her reply brief. Wolferts, 2013 UT App 235, ¶ ¶ 20, 24. The court similarly rejected the mother’s claim that the trial court denied her due process by not allowing her to testify or present witnesses at a hearing to determine the children’s best interests because she had not raised the constitutional issue before the trial court. Id. ¶ 22. Although the mother had filed a motion with the trial court seeking permission to testify and call witnesses, she did not assert she had a constitutional right to do so, nor did she argue she would be prejudiced if her participation was limited to cross-examining witnesses. Id. Therefore, the court refused to consider her constitutional argument. Id.