Utah Prior Appropriation Means No Riparian Rights Exist

Utah follows strict prior appropriation for water with zero recognition of riparian rights, and the DRE tests that doctrine against eastern state assumptions on every exam.

The DRE governs real estate licensing in Utah. The Pearson VUE exam tests 40 state specific questions alongside 80 national questions, with a minimum passing score of 70%. Water law, trust account reconciliation, and limited dual agency are where most candidates lose state-portion points. All three are poorly covered by national prep materials and all three appear consistently on the Utah exam. Here's the thing most people miss: "prior appropriation" sounds like a policy preference. In Utah, it's the only game in town. There's no backup riparian system to fall back on.

Utah Water Law

Utah's prior appropriation system means that owning land next to a river doesn't give you any right to use that river's water. That surprises nearly every candidate who studied outside the West, where riparian rights are the assumed default.

Utah follows strict prior appropriation with zero recognition of riparian rights, the exam tests that water rights are not automatically attached to land ownership, tripping up every student from an eastern state.

The Pearson VUE exam tests what prior appropriation means for a property transaction, specifically whether water rights transfer with the land deed, how they are acquired and registered, and what a buyer must do to ensure water access. Know that in Utah, water rights are separate from land ownership and must be conveyed explicitly or they stay with the seller. Why did the Utah buyer end up with waterfront property and no water? Because the deed transferred the land. The water rights didn't come with it.

Trust Account Reconciliation

Utah's trust account reconciliation rules set a specific monthly frequency and require both a running balance and a date-sequential transaction record. The exam tests the documentation requirements, not just the general concept that brokers must keep accurate records.

Principal brokers must reconcile trust account records with bank records at least monthly, maintaining a running balance and date-sequential record, the exam tests these specific frequency and documentation requirements.

The Pearson VUE exam will ask about the reconciliation cycle, what the running balance requirement means in practice, and what the DRE requires when a shortage is discovered. Know that the monthly reconciliation must compare three things: the broker's records, the bank statement, and the client ledger, and that discrepancies must be reported within a specific timeframe.

The DRE treats trust account violations as among the most serious licensing infractions. The exam tests not only the recordkeeping rules but also what a principal broker must do when records cannot be reconciled. Passive inaction is itself a violation.

Limited Dual Agency

Utah's limited dual agency framework requires written consent twice: once before the dual agency relationship is established and again at the time of the binding agreement. Candidates who know only the initial consent requirement will miss the questions testing the second consent trigger.

Limited dual agency consent requirements apply across western states. Idaho requires written consent before representing both parties, and Colorado uses transaction brokerage as an alternative to dual agency. Utah's limited dual agency rules require the same written consent but define the limitations on representation differently than either neighboring state.

Utah permits limited dual agency only with prior written consent confirmed again at binding agreement, the exam exploits the difference between "limited agent" and a standard agent's full fiduciary duties.

The exam tests which fiduciary duties are suspended under limited dual agency. Utah law specifically restricts what the agent can disclose to each party, and knowing those specific disclosure limits is what separates a passing score from a failing one on this topic.

Know what the written consent must contain, when each consent is required, and what a limited agent is prohibited from sharing with the opposing party. These specifics are tested at the scenario level, not as abstract definitions. The exam doesn't reward overthinking: it rewards candidates who know what limited agents cannot say, not just what they are called.