In Society of Professional Journalists v. Bullock, 743 P.2d 1166, 1174 (Utah 1987), the Court explained that this hesitancy is "rooted in concerns about courts deciding matters that are not properly reduced to a concrete dispute . . . and in concerns about considering matters better dealt with by another branch of government." Recognizing that these underlying policies would not be offended, we relaxed our standing requirement in Society of Professional Journalists and held that anyone who claimed, attempted to exercise, and was denied a right of access to a judicial proceeding had suffered an adequate adverse impact to satisfy the standing requirement even though the adverse impact was shared by all members of that class. Id. In so holding, the Court reiterated that "'it is difficult to make useful, all inclusive generalizations that determine whether standing exists in any given case, since the issue often depends on the facts of each case.'" Id.