Glenn Parker

The case involved a union local and its members suing the University of Wyoming, its president, and board of trustees to obtain a declaratory judgment, injunction, and other relief establishing rights to organize, select the union as bargaining agent, negotiate over wages and conditions, and require payroll deductions, while challenging the university's refusal to recognize or bargain with the union. The trial court dismissed the complaint on multiple grounds, including lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the suit against the university and trustees was barred by sovereign immunity because it constituted an action against the state without legislative consent, that the Declaratory Judgments Act did not supply such consent, and that claims against the officials individually were likewise precluded to preserve the doctrine of immunity. The court further rejected arguments that the university's employment functions were proprietary or that nominal damages claims created jurisdiction.

labor & employmentprocedure

In Cranston v. Thomson, resident electors who had run or planned to run for office, along with intervenors including the Wyoming State AFL-CIO and an education-focused political action committee, challenged Wyoming statutes that required candidates' written approval for expenditures made on their behalf, limited campaign spending, and restricted organizations such as labor unions and trade associations from making contributions without member approval and from in-district funds only. The plaintiffs and intervenors sought declaratory relief that the provisions were unconstitutional under numerous state and federal constitutional provisions and alleged potential civil and criminal penalties from their past and planned activities. The trial court dismissed the complaints, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that neither the pleadings nor the evidence established a justiciable controversy suitable for judicial resolution.

electionsfree speechlabor & employmentprocedure

The case involved a petition by the child's mother and stepfather to adopt William Robert Narragon without the consent of his biological father, who had been imprisoned since 1966 under a 25- to 30-year sentence and had provided no support. The trial court dismissed the petition, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed that ruling. The court held that the relevant statute permitting adoption without consent when a child has been maintained in a public institution or by the state welfare department for a year did not apply on these facts, as the child had remained in the mother's custody. It reasoned that adoption statutes must be strictly construed in favor of a nonconsenting parent and that courts may not add or alter statutory language to reach a different result.

family law

The case involved an appeal by Zier, acting pro se, against the City of Powell in which the appellant submitted papers intended as a brief but that did not comply with the Wyoming Supreme Court's rules, particularly Rule 12. The appellee moved to dismiss the appeal, after which the court notified the appellant of the deficiencies and gave an opportunity to correct them. The court ultimately granted the motion and dismissed the appeal, reasoning that the filings failed to comply with the rules, offered nothing to which the appellee could respond, and that reasonable adherence to procedural requirements is necessary for the proper administration of justice even for pro se litigants.

procedure

This case involved an appeal by Riverton Uranium Corporation from a Wyoming trial court's denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment entered against it in a suit to quiet title to mining claims brought by The Rim Group against multiple defendants. The appellant argued that it lacked notice of the trial setting and possessed a meritorious defense based on its claimed ownership rights derived from prior assignments. The Supreme Court of Wyoming affirmed the denial, holding that the court clerk was presumed to have mailed the formal order setting the hearing date as required by statute, and that no evidence rebutted this presumption. The court further reasoned that litigants have a duty to monitor court schedules and remain prepared to proceed even if a case is postponed briefly due to other matters, and that the motion failed to adequately allege facts showing a meritorious defense to the title claims.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a dispute over ownership of ten lode mining claims in Wyoming, with plaintiff Globe Mining Company alleging it had validly located the claims for uranium deposits starting in 1953 by complying with federal and state mining laws on discovery, marking, and recording, while defendants entered the land in 1955, overstaked with their own Andria claims, and counterclaimed for title. The trial court found for the defendants after evaluating the four required steps for valid claims under the statutes. On appeal, the court applied the rule that a mining claim judgment will stand unless clearly against the weight of the evidence and analyzed whether plaintiff's actions constituted adequate discovery of a disseminated lode in rock in place and related compliance. The opinion examined the legal meaning of a vein or lode for secondary uranium deposits in horizontal sandstone formations without requiring defined structural boundaries.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involved the State Highway Commission's eminent domain proceedings to acquire a right-of-way for reconstructing U.S. Highway 20, which affected an oil and gas lease held by the defendants on land owned by a third party; the commission provided notice only through newspaper publication under the relevant statute without attempting to send a registered letter to the defendants' known Denver address listed in the recorded lease. The defendants, unaware of the proceedings, challenged an injunction preventing their work on a well near the right-of-way. The court reversed the district court's permanent injunction, ruling that newspaper publication alone did not constitute adequate notice to nonresident interest holders when their addresses were ascertainable, as due process requires notice reasonably calculated to inform affected parties of proceedings impacting their property rights. The decision distinguished prior cases involving collateral attacks or actual notice and held that the statutory mailing requirement, even if directory, sets the standard for reasonable efforts, allowing the defendants an opportunity to claim damages.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned a dispute over ownership of livestock (sheep and cattle) between Mae E. Beck and the administrator of Donald Givens's estate, with Beck claiming title under two handwritten bills of sale from the deceased. The trial court ruled the documents were ineffective memoranda of incomplete sales, finding no valid gift or transfer due to insufficient evidence of delivery and intent. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court addressed the applicability of the dead man's statute to exclude testimony, the weight of uncontradicted witness evidence regarding delivery of the February 4 sheep instrument, and the validity of the transfers without physical movement of the animals; it ultimately upheld the sheep bill of sale as effective while denying rehearing on related points.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a woman who fell and broke her leg while stepping off a curb near a gutter drain inlet on Main Street in Lander, Wyoming, after parking her car; she sued the town for negligence in constructing and maintaining an allegedly dangerous, unguarded drain. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendant town at the close of evidence, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that municipal tort liability requires proof the negligence occurred in a proprietary rather than governmental function, that the plaintiff must adequately plead and prove duty, breach, and causation, and that her testimony about slipping on an unspecified slant or hole provided no evidence linking any defect to the injury. The drain had been built per an approved plan that was not inherently dangerous, and any maintenance issues were not shown to be the proximate cause.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case Bower v. Big Horn Canal Ass'n. centered on a landowner's effort to condemn a right-of-way across an irrigation canal association's property to install a pipeline transporting drainage water from his seepy irrigated lands to his separate arid lands. The court held that the plaintiff could obtain the easement for conveying only water drained from his own previously irrigated premises, subject to state engineer oversight, but could not claim or transport seepage originating directly from the canal or parallel ditches that might reduce the canal's available water. The reasoning rested on Wyoming water law distinguishing appropriable drainage from the plaintiff's lands from non-appropriable seepage still within the original irrigation project boundaries, confirming that the condemnation was regular and did not require a broader permit for the limited use. The judgment awarded the association $100 in stipulated damages and affirmed the trial outcome with modifications restricting the water source.

property

The case involved plaintiff Haines seeking a judicial declaration of a private right of way across land owned and occupied by defendants Baxter for ingress and egress to his own property, based on more than ten years of open and uncontested use. The trial court ruled for Haines, finding he was entitled to the private road easement and ordering defendants to cease interference. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, distinguishing the claim from prior precedent on public roads and holding that the evidence supported acquisition of a prescriptive easement limited to the historical private use by plaintiff, his family, employees, and guests. The court noted that the road had not been officially established as public and that any broader use would require additional proceedings.

property

The case concerned a dispute over the renewal of a Wyoming state grazing lease on public land, where Annajean Rayburne, the existing lessee, filed a renewal application shortly after O.H. and Alice Queen submitted a conflicting application; the commissioner and board of land commissioners awarded the lease to the Queens. Rayburne appealed to the district court, but that court dismissed the appeal as untimely under the thirty-day limit of § 24-306, W.C.S. 1945, measured from the board's May meeting. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the appeal period does not begin until the board's decision is rendered in a manner that makes it available to the parties—either by announcement in their presence or by a public written record—rather than from the internal board meeting date alone. The court reasoned that, absent a statute or regulation requiring earlier public notice, fairness requires the decision to be manifest before the clock starts for an aggrieved party.

propertyprocedure

The case involved defendant Wilson, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter under Wyoming statute after his car collided with another vehicle on a highway, resulting in the death of a five-month-old infant passenger in the other car; the collision occurred while Wilson was allegedly driving under the influence of alcohol and on the wrong side of the road. Wilson challenged the conviction on multiple constitutional grounds, including claims that the manslaughter statute's terms were unconstitutionally vague, that the short-form charging statute denied due process, that overlapping motor vehicle homicide statutes violated equal protection, and that the information was too vague to provide adequate notice. The court upheld the constitutionality of the relevant statutes but reversed the conviction, holding that the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion for a bill of particulars because the information was insufficiently specific to allow preparation of a defense. A new trial was ordered to remedy this procedural defect.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a challenge to the revocation of Lester Eastwood's driver's license by the Wyoming Highway Department under a 1953 statute allowing revocation after involvement in an accident resulting in death, without requiring proof of fault or negligence. Eastwood argued the law violated state constitutional provisions on due process and equal protection by lacking standards for revocation. Although the one-year revocation period had expired, rendering the case moot, the court addressed the merits due to public importance. The court held the statute unconstitutional under the Wyoming Constitution's separation of powers clause because it improperly delegated legislative authority to the executive branch without sufficient guidelines or standards for the agency's decisions. The core reasoning focused on the statute's failure to tie revocations to findings of incompetence, negligence, or other defined grounds, allowing arbitrary administrative action.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved sellers who hired a real estate broker to sell their property and later sued the broker in contract after learning he had secretly accepted an $850 commission from the buyers in addition to the 5% commission paid by the sellers. The trial court sustained the broker's demurrer and dismissed the petition, but the Wyoming Supreme Court reversed that ruling and remanded for further proceedings. The court held that the petition sufficiently alleged a breach of the broker's duty of good faith and loyalty, as an agent may not secretly profit from the subject matter of the agency. It explained that a broker employed by one party cannot collect a commission from the other without full disclosure and consent, and must account to the principal for any such secret profits. The opinion addressed only the sufficiency of the petition and expressed no view on the ultimate merits once all issues are properly pleaded.

business & regulatoryproperty

The case involved Elmo Dempsey “Johnny” Spears, who was charged with first-degree murder for fatally shooting Raymond Bookout in a bar following marital issues involving the deceased and the defendant's wife. A jury convicted him of second-degree murder with a recommendation for leniency, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty to twenty-five years in prison. On appeal, the defendant argued that the killing occurred in a heat of passion, warranting a manslaughter conviction rather than murder. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that there was substantial evidence for the jury to find the homicide was committed purposely and maliciously, as the defendant had time to deliberate and prior indications of intent.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Woolsulate, Inc. suing Fremont Lumber Co. for $3,105.75 plus interest for four loads of rock wool insulation that defendant received but did not pay for. After an initial default judgment was vacated, defendant answered with a general denial, a counterclaim for goods and services allegedly sold to plaintiff through Insulations, Inc., and assertions that it had dealt only with Insulations, Inc., not plaintiff. The trial court entered judgment for plaintiff, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that substantial evidence—including invoices, correspondence, and a telegram addressed to plaintiff—supported the finding that the transaction was between plaintiff and defendant and that defendant had failed to prove its offset defense.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved a lawsuit by plaintiff Wendell Dean Arnold against defendant Lewis M. Jennings for injuries from a single-car accident on a return trip from Sheridan, Wyoming, where Arnold was a non-paying guest passenger alleging gross negligence, willful, and wanton misconduct by the driver. The trial court, sitting without a jury, found that Arnold had failed to prove gross negligence or willful misconduct by a preponderance of the evidence after considering conflicting testimony about speed, warnings, and the circumstances of the crash, and dismissed the petition. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that the trial court as fact-finder was entitled to credit the defendant's version of events, that sufficient evidence supported the judgment, and that any evidentiary errors were harmless in light of the competent evidence sustaining the findings.

torts & liability

The case involved Burnham Hungary, an Arapahoe Indian arrested on the Wind River Indian Reservation for driving under the influence and lacking a driver's license; he initially pleaded guilty in justice court, received fines and jail time, and later sought to withdraw the pleas amid disputes over the record. After appeals and motions, the district court reviewed the sentence without conducting a trial on the merits. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that state statutes provide for an appeal from any justice court criminal judgment and require a trial de novo in district court, including arraignment and full proceedings as if the case originated there, even following a guilty plea below. The court emphasized that plain statutory language mandates this right to trial anew, and the defendant had been deprived of it.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a nighttime collision on a Wyoming county road in which a car owned by Roy L. Wilcox and driven by his sixteen-year-old son struck a horse led by defendant Frank J. Herbst, damaging the vehicle and injuring the son, his brother, and the horse. The trial court found both the son and Herbst negligent but held that the son's contributory negligence could not be imputed to the father as bailor and therefore awarded the father damages for the car while leaving the other claims unresolved. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, explaining that while the modern rule generally bars imputation of a bailee's negligence to the bailor, the trial court's finding of Herbst's negligence could not rest solely on the absence of a warning light and required resolution of conflicting evidence about the parties' positions and conduct. The court emphasized that questions of state policy, such as imputation within family relationships, are for the legislature rather than judicial determination.

torts & liabilityprocedure