Common use of Presumptions; Burden of Proof Clause in Contracts

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conduct.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance ​ payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conduct.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s 's right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s 's claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s 's right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conduct.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether an Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that an Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by such Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that such Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under or applicable law, shall be a defense to such Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that such Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any For purposes of any determination concerning of good faith, Indemnitee shall be deemed to have acted in good faith if Indemnitee’s action is based on the records or books of account of the Company or relevant Subsidiary, including financial statements, or on information supplied to Indemnitee by the officers of the Company or relevant Subsidiary in the course of their duties, or on the advice of legal counsel for the Company or relevant Subsidiary, by an independent certified public accountant or by an appraiser or other expert selected with reasonable care by the Company or relevant Subsidiary. The knowledge and/or actions, or failure to act, of any other director, officer, advisor, agent or employee of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries shall not be imputed to Indemnitee for purposes of determining the right to indemnification that is adverse under this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 4(b) shall not be deemed to be exclusive or to limit in any way the other circumstances in which the Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in deemed to have met the courts of the State of Utah. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conductset forth in this Agreement.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conduct.. ​ ​

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any a determination concerning Indemnitee’s right with respect to indemnificationentitlement to indemnification or the advancement of Expenses, there the Determining Party shall be a presumption presume that Indemnitee is entitled to indemnification or advancement of Expenses under this Agreement if Indemnitee has satisfied submitted a request for indemnification or the applicable standard advancement of conductExpenses in accordance with Sections 2(a) and 3(a), and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence shall have the burden of proof in connection with any determination contrary to the contrarythat presumption. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing the Determining Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing the Determining Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No In connection with any determination by the Determining Party or otherwise as to whether Indemnitee is entitled to be indemnified hereunder, the burden of proof shall be on the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) to establish that Indemnitee has is not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conductso entitled.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding Claim by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any the Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any the Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s 's claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No In connection with any determination by the Company (including without limitation Reviewing Party or otherwise as to whether Indemnitee is entitled to be indemnified hereunder, the Reviewing Party shall, to the fullest extent not prohibited by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) law, presume that Indemnitee has is entitled to indemnification under this Agreement, and the burden of proof shall, to the fullest extent not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall prohibited by law, be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by on the Company hereunder or create a presumption to establish that Indemnitee has is not met any applicable standard of conductso entitled.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding Claim by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any the Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any the Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No In connection with any determination by the Company (including without limitation Reviewing Party or otherwise as to whether Indemnitee is entitled to be indemnified hereunder, the Reviewing Party shall, to the fullest extent not prohibited by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) law, presume that Indemnitee has is entitled to indemnification under this Agreement, and the burden of proof shall, to the fullest extent not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall prohibited by law, be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by on the Company hereunder or create a presumption to establish that Indemnitee has is not met any applicable standard of conductso entitled.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any a determination concerning Indemnitee’s right with respect to indemnificationentitlement to indemnification or the advancement of Expenses, there the Determining Party shall be a presumption presume that Indemnitee is entitled to indemnification or advancement of Expenses under this Agreement if Indemnitee has satisfied submitted a request for indemnification or the applicable standard advancement of conductExpenses in accordance with Sections 2(a) and 3(a), and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence shall have the burden of proof in connection with any determination contrary to the contrarythat presumption. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing the Determining Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing the Determining Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s 's claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No In connection with any determination by the Determining Party or otherwise as to whether Indemnitee is entitled to be indemnified hereunder, the burden of proof shall be on the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) to establish that Indemnitee has is not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conductso entitled.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding Claim by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any the Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any the Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No In connection with any determination by the Company (including without limitation Reviewing Party or otherwise as to whether Indemnitee is entitled to be indemnified hereunder, to the fullest extent not prohibited by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct law, there shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has is entitled to indemnification in accordance with this Agreement and the Company shall, to the fullest extent not prohibited by law, have the burden of proof to overcome that presumption the and establish that Indemnitee is not so entitled. In any proceeding instituted by Indemnitee to enforce any rights pursuant to this Agreement, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Company shall (i) be precluded from asserting that the procedures and presumptions of this Agreement are not valid, binding and enforceable, (ii) stipulate in any such court that the Company is bound by all the provisions of this Agreement and (iii) be precluded from making any assertion to the contrary. The knowledge and/or actions, or failure to act, of any other director, officer, agent or employee of the Company or the Company itself shall not be imputed to Indemnitee for purposes of determining any rights under this Agreement. Indemnitee shall be presumed for purposes of any determination hereunder to have acted in good faith if Indemnitee’s action is based on the records or books of account of the Company, including financial statements, or on information supplied to Indemnitee by the officers of the Company in the course of their duties, or on the advice of legal counsel for the Company or the Board of Directors or counsel selected by any committee of the Board of Directors or on information or records given or reports made to the Company by an independent certified public accountant or by an appraiser, investment banker, compensation consultant, or other expert selected with reasonable care by the Company or the Board of Directors or any committee of the Board of Directors. The provisions of this Section 2(b) shall not be deemed to be exclusive or to limit in any way the other circumstances in which the Indemnitee may be deemed to have met any the applicable standard of conduct. Whether or not the foregoing provisions of this Section 2(b) are satisfied, it shall in any event be presumed that the Indemnitee has at all times acted in good faith and in a manner he or she reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the Company.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by Indemnitee in the courts of the State of Utah. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or ​ ​ reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conduct.

Presumptions; Burden of Proof. In making any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification, there shall be a presumption that Indemnitee has satisfied the applicable standard of conduct, and the Company may overcome such presumption only by its adducing clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. For purposes of this Agreement, the termination of any Proceeding by judgment, order, settlement (whether with or without court approval) or conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere, or its equivalent, shall not create a presumption that Indemnitee did not meet any particular standard of conduct or have any particular belief or that a court has determined that indemnification is not permitted by this Agreement or applicable law. In addition, neither the failure of any Reviewing Party to have made a determination as to whether Indemnitee has met any particular standard of conduct or had any particular belief, nor an actual determination by any Reviewing Party that Indemnitee has not met such standard of conduct or did not have such belief, prior to the commencement of legal proceedings by Indemnitee to secure a judicial determination that Indemnitee should be indemnified under this Agreement under applicable law, shall be a defense to Indemnitee’s 's claim or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any particular standard of conduct or did not have any particular belief. Any determination concerning Indemnitee’s right to indemnification that is adverse to Indemnitee may be challenged by the Indemnitee in the courts Court of Chancery of the State of UtahDelaware. No determination by the Company (including without limitation by its directors or any Independent Legal Counsel) that Indemnitee has not satisfied any applicable standard of conduct shall be a defense to any claim by Indemnitee for indemnification or reimbursement or advance payment of Expenses by the Company hereunder or create a presumption that Indemnitee has not met any applicable standard of conduct.