Charles Stuart Brown

The case involves Roy Lee Engberg's appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief following his convictions for first-degree murder and armed robbery, for which a jury imposed a death sentence after finding multiple aggravating circumstances. The Wyoming Supreme Court divided its review between issues affecting the determination of guilt or innocence and those impacting the capital sentence, applying procedural waiver rules to bar most claims that could have been raised on direct appeal. The court affirmed the convictions, concluding that remaining issues such as failure to disclose a hypnotic session with a witness, ineffective assistance of counsel, and cumulative error did not demonstrate constitutional violations warranting reversal. However, it set aside the death sentence due to errors in the sentencing proceedings. The core reasoning emphasized that post-conviction relief is limited to constitutional claims manifesting a miscarriage of justice and is not a substitute for direct appeal.

criminal lawprocedure

This case concerns an appeal from a Wyoming district court's default divorce decree and a subsequent nunc pro tunc amendment, entered after the husband failed to comply with discovery orders and was held in contempt. The decree granted the wife a divorce, awarded her specific marital assets, and ordered the husband to pay $600,000 in alimony over time, with the obligation surviving his death. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, concluding that the default judgment improperly provided relief beyond the scope of the complaint without an evidentiary hearing or notice, that the alimony provision extending past death was unauthorized, and that the nunc pro tunc order was entered without required motion or notice to the opposing party.

family lawprocedure

This case arose when plaintiff James Waggoner was injured in a car collision while driving a 1972 Jeep Wagoneer loaned to him by Burman Motors, a General Motors dealership, as a temporary replacement while his new GM pickup was being repaired. Waggoner sued General Motors and Burman Motors, asserting claims of strict liability in tort, breach of implied warranty, and negligence based on alleged brake defects in the Jeep. The trial court granted summary judgment dismissing the strict liability and warranty claims, and a jury returned a verdict for the defendants on the negligence claim, finding that the other driver was solely at fault and that Waggoner suffered no compensable damages. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Waggoner failed to present evidence of a defect sufficient to support the strict liability or warranty claims and that the jury's findings on negligence were supported by the record.

torts & liability

This case arose from a wrongful termination lawsuit brought by Brian Lorensen against his former employer, Lawrence-Allison & Associates West, Inc., after he was fired for allegedly hunting an antelope on a restricted federal reserve and transporting it in a government vehicle, in violation of his employment contract. The trial court applied collateral estoppel based on an earlier unemployment benefits administrative decision that found no misconduct and entered a default judgment on liability against the employer when its counsel withdrew on the eve of trial. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed the default judgment, ruling that the trial court failed to properly inform itself before allowing withdrawal and imposing default, and remanded the case for further proceedings while questioning the application of collateral estoppel.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved a dispute over the foreclosure of a contractor's lien for architectural services on property owned by W.A.S., Inc., where the architect initially sued the owner and obtained a default judgment before the owner filed for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy filing triggered an automatic stay under federal law that halted further proceedings, including efforts to add the property's mortgage holders as defendants. After the bankruptcy was dismissed, the architect filed an amended complaint joining the mortgagees beyond the 180-day period set by Wyoming statute for commencing lien foreclosure actions. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the architect, holding that the bankruptcy stay applied to the lien action and that 11 U.S.C. § 108(c) tolled the state statute of limitations, making the amended complaint timely and establishing the lien's priority over the mortgage.

propertyprocedure

This case concerned a dispute over ownership of mineral rights (oil, gas, and other hydrocarbons) beneath streets and alleys in the Town of Moorcroft that had been dedicated to public use by the original plat filed by Lincoln Land Company in 1901. The abutting landowners sued for declaratory judgment to quiet title after the Town leased the minerals, claiming the rights passed to them through their lot purchases; the Town asserted ownership under a state statute treating the plat as a fee simple conveyance for public purposes, while Lincoln claimed it retained the minerals. The Wyoming Supreme Court held that the mineral rights remained with the original dedicator, Lincoln Land Company. It reasoned that the dedication created only a determinable fee in the surface estate for streets and alleys, without conveying the subsurface minerals, and that the subsequent warranty deeds to lot owners did not transfer or reserve any mineral interests from Lincoln. The Court declined to overturn its prior precedent in City of Evanston v. Robinson and applied general rules that a dedication or conveyance without explicit reservation passes only the intended surface rights.

property

The case involved an electrical contractor that performed remodeling work on leased property under a contract with the tenant, who later filed for bankruptcy without paying. After failing to timely foreclose its mechanic's lien against the property owner, the contractor sued the owner on a quantum meruit theory seeking recovery for the value of its services. The trial court awarded judgment to the contractor, but the Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, holding that the elements of unjust enrichment were not satisfied because the owner did not accept or use all of the services and the contractor had expected payment from the tenant rather than the owner. The court further noted that any potential credit or enrichment to the owner from the improvements was not shown to be unjust under the circumstances, including the contractor's failure to pursue remedies in the tenant's bankruptcy.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned a dispute over ownership of gravel removed from land in Wyoming during highway construction. Miller Land & Mineral Company claimed the gravel under a deed reservation of "all minerals and mineral rights," which had been conveyed from the original grantor's estate, while the surface owners (the Mitchells) and the State Highway Commission maintained that gravel belonged to the surface estate. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Mitchells and the State, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that the reservation language was unambiguous but that, under Wyoming custom and usage, gravel is not considered a mineral and is instead part of the surface; extrinsic evidence of intent was unnecessary. The decision rested on the principle that general mineral reservations do not encompass gravel absent specific language or circumstances indicating otherwise.

property

This case arose from a wrongful death lawsuit filed after a hunting accident in which Steven Bannister allegedly shot and killed Lance Lanum. The plaintiff sought to hold Steven's father, Gene Bannister, vicariously liable on theories of joint enterprise and master-servant or agency relationship. The district court granted summary judgment for Gene Bannister, concluding there was no genuine issue of material fact regarding direction or control to support vicarious liability and that any statutory violation by the father was not the proximate cause of the death due to an intervening cause. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, applying the same summary judgment standards and agreeing that the record showed insufficient evidence of the required elements for imputing negligence.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case concerned whether an insured could stack uninsured motorist and medical payment coverages across multiple vehicles listed in a single auto insurance policy when injured by an uninsured motorist in one of the covered vehicles. The trial court granted summary judgment allowing the insured to aggregate the limits, resulting in $60,000 uninsured motorist coverage and $1,500 medical payments. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, holding that the policy language was unambiguous in limiting coverage to the amounts for one vehicle per accident and that no Wyoming public policy required stacking. The court reasoned that the contract terms and statutory framework supported enforcing the policy's per-accident limits without aggregation.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

In Osborn v. Shillinger, the Wyoming Supreme Court considered a motion for stay of execution filed by Kevin Winston Osborn, a capital defendant who had pleaded guilty and whose execution date had been set by the district court. The court denied the motion after reviewing the record, finding the pleadings defective and the request untimely. A special concurrence agreed with the denial but noted that Osborn could still file a compliant petition for relief. A dissent argued that the procedural failures, including the lack of a timely appeal notice, should not foreclose access to appellate review in a death penalty case where the defendant had no jury trial.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned an oral contract for the sale of a horse trailer originally between the appellant and the appellee's former husband, which was assigned to the appellee as part of a divorce property settlement. The trial court found that a valid contract existed and entered judgment for the appellee in the amount of $14,000 plus prejudgment interest. On appeal, the court affirmed, determining that substantial evidence supported the finding of an oral contract based on the parties' undisputed testimony and the appellant's consistent actions after taking possession, that the appellant lacked standing to challenge the valuation of the assigned claim in the divorce proceeding, and that the claim was liquidated because the purchase price was undisputed and the contract date could be determined with reasonable certainty.

family lawproperty

This case concerns a creditor's action to set aside a deed and bill of sale transferring real estate and sheep from debtor Herman George to his mother as fraudulent conveyances made to hinder creditors, following an unsatisfied judgment on a promissory note. After a prior appeal affirming the real estate ruling but remanding the personal property issue, the trial court on retrial excluded various documents from earlier family litigation and an assessment schedule, then ruled for the defendants. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the excluded evidence should have been admitted. The court reasoned that in disputes over alleged fraudulent family transfers, courts apply liberal evidentiary standards allowing circumstantial evidence to be weighed against direct testimony of good faith and valuable consideration.

propertyprocedure

This case involves an appeal to the Wyoming Supreme Court from a judgment of the District Court of Laramie County. Only one of the three plaintiffs in error, Wellington C. Stein, filed a motion for a new trial in the lower court, but the petition in error filed in the appellate court was a joint petition by all three. The court dismissed the appeal on a motion to dismiss, holding that the two assignments of error were insufficient because a joint assignment of error must be valid as to all parties joining in it or it fails as to all. The court reasoned that the failure of the other two parties to move for a new trial made the joint assignment invalid as to them, and that filing a motion for new trial was not required for appellate jurisdiction but was necessary to preserve the claimed errors for review under the applicable rules.

procedure

This case involved a creditor who obtained a judgment against John Schuneman, levied on the couple's residence in Albany County as a homestead exceeding the statutory $2,500 exemption, and purchased it at a sheriff's sale for $3,000 without paying the exemption amount. After the levy, the defendants conveyed the property without consideration through a third party to Elizabeth Schuneman; the creditor then sought to treat the property as non-exempt and resisted redemption. The trial court permitted redemption upon payment of the $527 excess over the exemption plus interest. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the creditor was bound by his initial homestead theory and could not switch positions after the sale, that a transfer of title to the wife did not abandon the homestead exemption, and that the husband retained a sufficient possessory interest as head of the family to exercise the statutory right of redemption as the judgment defendant.

propertyprocedurefamily law

In Boyle v. Mountford, the plaintiff, an uneducated miner, and the defendant, a geologist, had jointly located mineral claims; the plaintiff alleged that the defendant fraudulently induced him to sign a quitclaim deed to his interest in one claim by representing it as a power of attorney to facilitate a sale, while the defendant claimed it was in exchange for future claim locations. The trial court ruled for the plaintiff, finding the elements of fraud present given the parties' relationship of confidence and the plaintiff's inability to read the document. On appeal, the court affirmed, holding that the plaintiff's evidence established a prima facie case of fraud and that the defendant waived review of the denial of his motion for judgment by proceeding with his defense without renewing the motion at the close of all evidence. The court also found no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings and no error in admitting limited testimony to rebut an accusation against plaintiff's counsel.

propertytorts & liability

The case involved a bank receiver suing six former directors of an insolvent bank on a promissory note they executed to cover a $4100 loss from a compromised loan, with the note intended as a temporary 25% stock assessment until a formal vote. After an initial judgment for the defendants, the trial court reviewed the record and granted the plaintiff a new trial under Wyoming statute, without specifying reasons. On appeal, the court affirmed the new-trial order, holding that trial judges have wide discretion in such matters and that the record contained evidence supporting potential liability, including that the note was supported by consideration as a voluntary assessment by corporate officers. The court declined to decide the ultimate merits of liability, noting that the evidence could warrant a different outcome on retrial.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved a plaintiff who purchased shares of bank stock from the defendant bank president, relying on the defendant's oral assurance at the time of sale that he would take the stock back and refund the purchase price if the plaintiff became dissatisfied. After the plaintiff later demanded repayment and was refused, the trial court directed a verdict for the defendant on the ground that the oral promise was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds provision of the Uniform Sales Act governing contracts for goods or choses in action valued at fifty dollars or more. On appeal, the court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the promise was not a separate contract to repurchase but instead took the nature of an indemnity agreement that was not within the statute, particularly where the transaction occurred as part of the original sale and the defendant was an interested officer promoting the stock. The court further reasoned that the evidence could support recovery under theories treating the oral assurance as integrated with the sale or as indemnity, allowing the case to proceed to a jury.

business & regulatory

The case Neiderjohn v. Thompson concerned a receiver of a failed national bank bringing suit against a shareholder for his statutory liability on bank stock and on a promissory note, with garnishment proceedings targeting shares in a mercantile company. An intervener claimed those shares as collateral security for a loan to the defendant. The trial court entered judgment for the receiver against both the defendant and intervener. On appeal by the intervener, the court held that the defendant had waived objections by not appealing the main judgment, that the intervention proceeding was properly decided on the merits since no objection was raised, and that the evidence supported the finding against the intervener's claim; additionally, the court properly denied a motion to dismiss without prejudice to avoid burdening the receiver with further litigation.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

In Town Council v. Ladd, Walter Ladd sued the Town Council of Hudson, Wyoming, alleging that the town's earlier change to the Little Popo Agie River channel caused flood damage in 1925 to his irrigation ditch and land, for which he sought compensation including repair costs and lost value. The trial court awarded Ladd $750 after a bench trial, but the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial. The core reasoning was that the evidence was insufficient to establish the amount of damages under the proper measure for permanent injury to real property (difference in market value before and after), as the offered testimony on alternative water sources was incomplete and no proof supported the pleaded $2,000 diminution in value; other issues like the statute of limitations and failure to file a written claim were waived for not being raised by answer or demurrer, and the action was deemed one on the case rather than trespass so possession was not required.

propertyproceduretorts & liability