Richard V. Thomas

The case involved a medical malpractice suit by Harston against Campbell County Memorial Hospital, alleging the hospital's independent negligence in credentialing and reviewing a physician's staff privileges, as well as failures in protocols, testing, and record-keeping that contributed to patient injuries. The district court restricted Harston's discovery of incident reports and credentialing materials, then granted summary judgment to the hospital on grounds that she had not raised a genuine issue of material fact. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by limiting discovery without first conducting an in camera inspection and balancing interests under the relevant statute, as required by precedent in Greenwood v. Wierdsma. The court reasoned that Harston was entitled to the opportunity to obtain and use the information before summary judgment could be properly assessed, and remanded the case for further proceedings, while rejecting other jurisdictional and release arguments.

proceduretorts & liabilityhealthcare

The case involved farmers operating as Diamond Ring Farms who sued Stauffer Chemical Company after the insecticide Dyfonate 20-G failed to control western corn rootworms on their continuous corn crops, resulting in crop damage and related cattle operation losses; they claimed breach of express and implied warranties. A jury awarded damages, but the trial court had limited consequential damages to 1985 crop losses and related profits via summary judgment and addressed issues including Stauffer's attempts to enforce warranty disclaimers and liability limits on product labels. On appeal and cross-appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the district court's judgment in full, finding no reversible error in rulings on warranty enforceability, admissibility of expert testimony and test plot evidence, denial of directed verdict, jury instructions, cost awards, or the scope of recoverable damages.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

The case involved Lentz Cheatham's conviction for involuntary manslaughter under Wyoming law after his wife died from a subdural hematoma and related complications following an evening of drinking and reported altercations. Cheatham challenged the district court's jurisdiction due to alleged defects in the filing of the information from county court, the admission of his custodial statements, alleged prosecutorial comments on his silence, and the sufficiency of the evidence. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the charging documents properly invoked jurisdiction, the statements were admissible, any comments on silence were not reversible error, and the evidence supported the jury's verdict.

criminal lawprocedure

In Lewis v. State, the defendant was charged with aggravated burglary and first-degree arson after breaking into a trailer, stealing items, and setting it on fire; he pleaded not guilty by reason of mental illness or deficiency but was convicted after a jury trial. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court addressed whether jury instructions based on 1983 amendments to the mental responsibility statutes— which narrowed the definition of mental illness and shifted the full burden of proof to the defendant—could be applied to offenses committed before the amendments took effect. The court reversed the convictions and remanded the case, holding that the amendments affected substantive rights and could not retroactively govern the defendant's plea, so the jury should have been instructed under the prior statutes that placed the burden on the prosecution to prove mental responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt. The decision rested on the principle that procedural changes may apply retroactively but substantive alterations to defenses and burdens of proof may not.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved appellant Skurdal, who received state drafts for worker's compensation benefits and minor property damage but refused payment in federal reserve notes, demanding instead gold or silver coin or a 32-to-1 exchange ratio based on silver coin prices, while also seeking a declaration that the federal government's issuance of paper currency is unconstitutional. The trial court dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act and for failure to state a claim. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the Claims Act does not confer authority on state courts to adjudicate challenges to federal monetary powers and that Skurdal presented no relevant legal authority or factual basis showing the state's tender of federal notes violated worker's compensation statutes or constituted inadequate compensation. The court further declined to certify reasonable cause for the appeal and assessed a $100 fee against Skurdal under appellate rules.

federal powerprocedurelabor & employment

This case involves appellant Mark A. Hopkinson's request for grand jury proceedings filed in Uinta County District Court, which was ancillary to a habeas corpus petition. The district court denied the request, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirms that denial on its own motion. The court found the request substantively identical to prior requests rejected in Hopkinson IV and other earlier decisions in the long-running series of cases stemming from Hopkinson's original criminal conviction. Because the related habeas petition had already been denied by this Court in Hopkinson VI, no proceeding was pending, making discovery unavailable under Rule 26(b)(1). The issue was also res judicata, and the trial judge with direct knowledge of the case was the appropriate decision-maker.

criminal lawprocedure