or (3) when the employee intentionally or knowingly gave false testimony in a judicial or administrative proceeding. Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-4(3)(b); id. § 63-30-4(4). Because the second and third exceptions are not relevant here, we do not discuss them. 16 . Seeid. § 63-30-4(3)-(4) (1997 & Supp.2002); Nielson v. Gurley, 888 P.2d 130, 135 (Utah Ct.App.1994) ("[If the employee acted or failed to act through malice or fraud, the employee cannot successfully invoke governmental immunity as an affirmative defense."). 17 . Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-11(2) (Supp.2002) ("Any person having a claim for injury against a governmental entity, or against its employee ... shall file a written notice of claim with the entity before maintaining an action ...." (emphasis added)); Nielson, 888 P.2d at 135-36 (<HOLDING>). 18 . Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-4(4). 19 . Utah
holding that supervisory employee is not an employer under the terms of cfepa and because the employer is liable for the employees actions a plaintiff may not maintain an action against the employee individually under conngenstat  46a60 holding that where employee was aware of dissolution abatement of claims provision applied even in absence of written notice because employee had actual notice holding that in order for a plaintiff to file suit against the government on a contract claim in the court of federal claims a plaintiff must have either direct privity or thirdparty beneficiary status holding that a plaintiff must comply with the notice of claim requirements in order to maintain an action against a government employee even if the plaintiff claims that the employee acted with fraud or malice holding that a notice recommending termination of an employee to the board without notice to the employee of employees right to attend and dispute the claims violated due process