Larry L. Lehman

In Roberts v. Estate of Randall, a snowmobile collision on a groomed forest trail killed one operator and seriously injured the other, prompting a negligence suit by the injured plaintiff and his wife against the deceased's estate. The jury apportioned fault at 74% to the plaintiff and 26% to the defendant, after receiving instructions applying various motor vehicle statutes to the snowmobile operators. The Wyoming Supreme Court held that the statutes from the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways properly govern snowmobile operation for negligence determinations, that the sudden emergency doctrine did not apply on the evidence presented, and that the jury instructions and verdict were proper, resulting in affirmance of the judgment.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved an appeal from the denial of workers' compensation benefits to Brett Yenne-Tully, who claimed that his 1997 herniated disc was a second compensable injury stemming from a 1989 workplace fall. The hearing examiner and the Wyoming Supreme Court determined that Yenne-Tully was not entitled to benefits under the second compensable injury rule. The core reasoning was that medical evidence attributed only 30% of the causation to the original work injury, with the majority resulting from cumulative trauma due to normal day-to-day activities outside of work, which is excluded from coverage under Wyoming law.

labor & employment

The case involves claims to federal reserved water rights by non-Indian owners of lands originally allotted to Indians on the Wind River Indian Reservation within the Big Horn River System. The Wyoming Supreme Court addressed whether these "Walton" claimants had established beneficial use of water within a reasonable time after the allotments were transferred from Indian ownership, particularly in relation to the completion of the Wind River Irrigation Project. The court reversed the denial of some claims, holding that claimants could qualify if they showed beneficial use within a reasonable time after project facilities became available, but affirmed that the reasonable time period begins upon transfer from allotment status and does not reset with later Indian purchases, and upheld the weight given to certain historical evidence.

propertyfederal power

This case involved George Griffin’s challenge to the suspension of his driver’s license after he refused a chemical test under Wyoming’s implied consent law following a traffic stop for speeding and erratic driving. The Office of Administrative Hearings upheld the suspension, finding probable cause for arrest based on the officer’s observations and field sobriety tests, and the district court affirmed. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court held that the hearing examiner properly admitted the field sobriety test results because the officer’s training and administration methods provided adequate foundation under the rules of evidence. The court further concluded that substantial evidence supported probable cause to arrest for driving while under the influence, including Griffin’s bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, odor of alcohol, admission of drinking, difficulty with his license, and poor performance on the tests. The court therefore affirmed the agency’s decision to suspend the license for eighteen months due to the prior DWUI conviction.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a Wyoming prisoner, Kerry Garnett, who sued Dr. John Coyle, a physician providing care at the state penitentiary, alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as medical malpractice in the treatment of his carpal tunnel syndrome. The district court granted summary judgment to Dr. Coyle, finding that Garnett had failed to properly plead the § 1983 claim, establish a prima facie Eighth Amendment violation, or present evidence sufficient to support a malpractice action. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that there were no genuine issues of material fact because Garnett produced no expert medical testimony to show a breach of the standard of care or deliberate indifference, while Dr. Coyle had submitted expert affidavits establishing that the conservative treatment approach and decisions met applicable standards. The court applied standard summary judgment principles, noting that the burden shifted to the plaintiff after the defendant made a prima facie showing, and that contract provisions or NCCHC standards alone could not substitute for expert evidence.

criminal lawcivil rightshealthcareprocedure

The case involved a dispute over whether the State Board of Equalization was required to use formal contested case procedures when conducting a 'careful examination' of Sublette County's petition alleging improper ad valorem tax valuations of Exxon's gas production under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-1-304(a)(xiv). Sublette County filed a petition for a writ of mandamus after the Board opted for a less formal regulatory proceeding that involved reviewing submissions and valuations from the Department of Revenue without allowing full party participation or cross-examination. The district court denied the writ, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the statute mandates a careful examination but does not require contested case procedures, leaving the Board discretion in the format of its regulatory review. The court noted that Sublette County lacked standing for direct judicial review of the Board's report and that mandamus was not appropriate to compel a specific procedural method.

taxesprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case involved a former nurse's lawsuit against a county hospital and its employees for wrongful termination and related tort claims, including defamation and breach of contract. The plaintiff filed a governmental claim in July 1998 but did not file her court complaint until August 1999, exceeding the one-year statute of limitations under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding no tolling applied because the hospital had applicable insurance coverage. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the plaintiff failed to meet the Act's strict filing requirements, which bar suits if not followed, and that the tolling provision did not apply here.

labor & employmentproceduretorts & liability

The case involved a car accident in which a City of Rawlins employee driving a snowplow struck the Beaulieu family's vehicle, leading to the filing of notices of claim against the city under the Governmental Claims Act and a subsequent lawsuit. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding the suit untimely because it was filed more than one year after the first notice of claim. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the first notice did not trigger the one-year statute of limitations under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-39-114 because it failed to meet the requirements of Wyo. Const. art. 16, § 7. The court reasoned that a valid claim against a municipality must be in writing, certified under penalty of perjury (i.e., signed by the claimant), and filed with the appropriate auditing officer, none of which occurred with the initial document, which appeared to have been prepared by an insurer rather than the claimants.

proceduretorts & liability

Tri County Telephone Association and TCT West appealed an order from the Wyoming Public Service Commission that rejected their proposed rate increases for noncompetitive local exchange services and associated increases in Universal Service Fund subsidies. The companies had filed notices seeking to charge rates as high as $527 per month and to receive additional USF support, but the Commission instead approved lower rates proposed by the Consumer Advocate Staff and later removed the companies' price sheets from its records. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the Commission's order, holding that it correctly applied the Wyoming Telecommunications Act, which requires Commission oversight of prices for noncompetitive services through filing, notice, and review procedures rather than unilateral company action.

business & regulatory

This case is the fourth appeal in a dispute arising from the 1989 dissolution of an accounting partnership formed by SKA and Dorr & Associates, in which SKA sought to collect arbitration awards for unpaid compensation, damages, and work in process from members of the Dorr faction. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed the district court's Order on Reconsideration, holding that the lower court had failed to comply with the mandate from the prior decision in Dorr III, and remanded with instructions to enter judgments against Mark Dorr and Steven Bentley, jointly and severally, for the $105,163.78 arbitration award plus interest from August 1989, for the $1,451.96 work-in-process amount plus interest, and to direct payment of held funds to SKA. The court determined that declaratory judgment relief was available to resolve the effect of prior judgments and that prejudgment interest was appropriate on the arbitration award, rendering other pending appeals moot due to the resolution of the core dispute.

business & regulatoryprocedure

George Dubrowski sued the Wyoming Liquor Commission and various state officials after his termination as Deputy Director through a reduction in force, asserting claims for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Although the Personnel Review Board later ruled the termination improper, the legislature had already reorganized the agency and eliminated the deputy director position. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on all claims, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that no special employment relationship existed to support the good faith claim and that Dubrowski had received full compensation for the period until the legislature eliminated his position, after which he had no contractual rights due to legislative immunity.

labor & employment

This case involved a dispute between the Clines and Chinook Log Homes over construction of a commercial building, where the Clines sued Chinook for alleged failure to follow certain drawings in the November 1993 contract. After the district court granted summary judgment to Chinook on the ground that the Clines could not prove damages, Chinook sought reimbursement for attorneys' fees and costs under the contract's fee-shifting provision. The district court awarded Chinook a portion of its requested fees and costs but denied recovery for work performed before a co-defendant was dismissed, due to lack of segregation of fees between the defendants. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the contractual language authorized fee recovery for the prevailing party, that fees must generally be segregated between clients under the American rule, and that the prevailing party could recover appellate fees under the same provision.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved Dr. Rebecca Painter challenging an administrative order from the Wyoming Board of Medicine that conditioned her medical license and required her to pay certain proceeding costs after patient complaints about her diagnosis and treatment. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed the Board's order in full. The court held that the proceedings deviated from statutory and constitutional requirements, including the use of a preponderance standard rather than clear and convincing evidence given the licensee's substantial property interest and the Board's combined investigative and adjudicative roles, the failure to provide examination reports or proper notice of rights, and the improper assessment of hearing officer costs.

procedurehealthcarebusiness & regulatory

This case involved Roy Dale Ryan's appeal from his conviction for the second-degree murder of his wife after he was found at the scene with a gunshot wound and made statements suggesting involvement in the incident. Ryan raised multiple claims of trial error, including improper judicial comments to the jury pool, jury tampering concerns, the competency of a child witness, admission of expert testimony profiling batterers as prone to kill, the validity of a search warrant, remote witness testimony, improper security officer comments to jurors, and an allegedly illegal definite life sentence. The Wyoming Supreme Court held that while the expert testimony constituted impermissible character profiling in violation of evidentiary rules, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the other evidence. The court rejected all remaining claims as lacking merit and affirmed the conviction and sentence.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

This case involved Kit Summers' claim for Wyoming workers' compensation benefits for a panic disorder he attributed to job stress at Amoco Production Company, where he had worked in increasingly demanding roles until his termination in 1994; he received a diagnosis in 1993 but did not file his injury report until 1996. The Workers' Safety and Compensation Division denied the claim, and a hearing examiner upheld the denial on grounds including application of post-1994 mental injury exclusions and untimely reporting. The district court reversed the denial and remanded for a benefits calculation. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the law in effect at the time of injury applied, that the Division had waived its timeliness objection by failing to raise it before the hearing examiner, and that timely reporting under the statute was not a jurisdictional prerequisite.

labor & employmentprocedure

In this case, a father sought to terminate or suspend his child support obligation under a 1985 divorce decree after his adult son was convicted of felonies and incarcerated in an adult detention facility. The district court denied the request to end support but ordered payments redirected to the facility; on appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court reversed that redirection order. The court agreed that the son's incarceration constituted a material change in circumstances warranting modification review, but held there was no statutory or common-law authority in a divorce modification proceeding to redirect support to an adult facility. Instead, the support obligation continues to be paid to the custodial mother as trustee for the child's needs, as the juvenile justice statute cited by the parties applies only to juvenile proceedings and a separate civil action would be required for the facility to seek reimbursement.

family law

The case concerned whether the Wyoming Department of Family Services had authority to intervene in a child and spousal support enforcement action involving a non-recipient of public assistance. On rehearing, the court modified its prior opinion and held that Wyo. Stat. § 20-6-106(m)(ii) and § 20-6-306(a) together authorize the Department to bring and enforce such actions in its own name without regard to the obligee's public assistance status. The court reasoned that the statutory language providing the same services to non-recipients of public assistance confers the necessary authority under Wyo. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(1) for intervention of right. It remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings and noted the statute's lack of clarity on unconditional intervention rights.

family lawprocedure

This case involved an appeal by a husband seeking to set aside a 1992 Wyoming divorce decree under W.R.C.P. 60(b)(4), claiming the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because his wife had not met the statutory 60-day residency requirement before filing. The district court denied the motion, finding the wife had maintained her Wyoming domicile and that the husband was estopped from challenging the decree. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the original decree carried a presumption of jurisdictional regularity, the wife presented prima facie evidence of residence, and both parties had relied on the decree by remarrying and having children from those marriages before the husband raised the issue years later amid child support enforcement proceedings. The court applied principles of estoppel to bar the challenge while noting the limited scope of its holding balancing jurisdiction and equitable considerations.

family lawprocedure

The case involved buyers who purchased real estate from sellers under a contract for deed that included a payment schedule with a mathematical error, resulting in annual installments that fell short of fully paying the principal and interest on the financed balance. After the buyers completed the ten specified payments and demanded the deed, the sellers refused, citing the shortfall. The district court found a mutual mistake in the contract terms, determined that the parties intended payment of the full purchase price and interest, and ordered the buyers to continue the annual installments until the balance was satisfied. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the contract was unambiguous as to the total amount owed and that reformation was appropriate to correct the shared misconception about the payment schedule's effect.

property

In Tilley v. State, Eric Tilley was convicted on seven counts of making obscene phone calls under Wyoming Statute 6-6-103 after pleading guilty to charges involving sexually explicit and threatening calls to multiple women; he appealed both his original sentence of seven consecutive one-year county jail terms and the reassignment of his case to a different judge before sentencing. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, sentence, and judge assignment. The court reasoned that each count constituted a separate offense carrying a statutory maximum of one year, with no prohibition on consecutive sentences for multiple misdemeanors as sentencing discretion rests with the trial court. It further held that the judge reassignment was authorized by Article 5, Section 11 of the Wyoming Constitution, which permits district judges to sit for one another, and that the appellant failed to show plain error in the absence of an objection or stated reason for the assignment.

criminal lawprocedure