Barton R. Voigt

This case involved a long-running dispute over ranch property in Wyoming, where Simek sought to enforce a purchase option from the estate of the prior owner and the parties reached multiple settlement agreements, including an oral 2005 agreement for Simek to buy the retained residential parcel. The district court enforced the 2005 oral agreement after an evidentiary hearing, and Simek appealed, challenging the hearing format, the rejection of an earlier written agreement, and the enforceability of the oral deal under the statute of frauds. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the estate's partial performance—transferring the property key to Simek—removed the agreement from the statute of frauds under equitable principles, allowing enforcement despite the lack of a signed writing. The court also upheld the denial of the earlier agreement because it had been rejected by the Illinois probate court and found no error in conducting part of the hearing by telephone.

propertyprocedure

In Cosco v. Lampert, an inmate filed two civil actions against the Wyoming Department of Corrections alleging wrongful deprivation of personal property, including hobby materials confiscated after stricter prison regulations and religious items lost or destroyed during a transfer to an out-of-state facility. The district court consolidated and dismissed the claims with prejudice, concluding there was no waiver of governmental immunity under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act and that Cosco had not timely filed the required notice of claim with the proper state entity. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, holding the claims were barred by the absence of an immunity waiver and failure to follow statutory claim procedures, rejected constitutional arguments under due process, equal protection, and religious liberty provisions due to insufficient allegations, and declined to fashion a new judicial remedy while barring Cosco from future related filings without permission.

criminal lawcivil rightspropertyprocedure

This case concerns attorney William Daniel Elsom's petition to lift a disciplinary suspension and be reinstated to practice law in Wyoming following a criminal conviction. The Board of Professional Responsibility held a hearing, found that Elsom had met the conditions of his suspension, expressed remorse, and demonstrated fitness to practice, and recommended reinstatement. The Wyoming Supreme Court adopted the Board's findings in part, lifted the disciplinary suspension, but denied reinstatement because Elsom remained under a separate CLE suspension with no recommendation for reinstatement from the Board of Continuing Legal Education. The court reasoned that the prior suspension order required resolution of the CLE matter as an independent condition before full reinstatement could occur.

criminal lawprocedure

This case concerned a dispute between a junkyard operator and the City of Rawlins over the legality of operating the business on multiple parcels subject to zoning rules adopted in 1978 and 1989, a 1982 settlement agreement from prior litigation, and a municipal nuisance ordinance. The district court granted partial summary judgment enforcing the settlement agreement against the owner, requiring removal of operations from residential areas and compliance with the Wyoming Junkyard Control Act, while leaving factual questions about abandonment and grandfathered rights for trial; it also upheld a municipal court conviction for the nuisance violation. On appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, concluding that the settlement agreement was valid and binding as a covenant running with the land, thereby eliminating grandfathered rights in non-industrial zones, but remanding for further findings on whether junkyard use had been abandoned in certain industrial-zoned areas outside the fenced operation.

propertybusiness & regulatorycriminal law

This case concerns a dispute between two homeowners associations over authority to regulate fishing and recreational activities at the Crescent H Ranch in Wyoming. The First Filing Association argued that Rules and Regulations it adopted with the Fourth Filing Association created a binding contract for joint regulation, while the Fourth Filing Association and an intervenor contended that the Fourth Filing Association held sole regulatory authority under prior agreements. The district court granted summary judgment to the Fourth Filing Association, and the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that the Rules and Regulations lacked consideration and did not form a contract, and that uniform Fishing License and Use Agreements from a 1997 bankruptcy settlement—recorded in land records and superseding prior instruments—reserved regulatory power exclusively to the Licensor, which had been assigned to the Fourth Filing Association. The First Filing Association was not a Licensor and thus had no joint authority.

propertyprocedure

The case involved Exxon Mobil Corporation's challenge to the Wyoming Department of Revenue's taxation of natural gas produced at its LaBarge Project for 2005. The disputes concerned whether the Black Canyon dehydration facility constituted the statutory "initial dehydrator" for purposes of determining the point of valuation under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-14-203(b)(iv) and whether post-processing transportation expenses were properly excluded from the direct cost ratio when applying the proportionate profits valuation method under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-14-203(b)(vi)(D). The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed the Board of Equalization's rulings on both issues, concluding that Black Canyon was a processing facility rather than the initial dehydrator and that the statute required inclusion of the transportation costs in the direct cost ratio, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its interpretation.

taxesbusiness & regulatory