Summary 2006 WY 6

Summary of Decision issued January 11, 2006

[SPECIAL NOTE: These opinions use the "Universal Citation." They were given "official" citations when they were issued. You should use these citations whenever you cite these opinions, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinions that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Sponsel, et al. v. Park County, et al.

Citation: 2006 WY 6

Docket Number: 05-109

Appeal from the District Court of Park County, Honorable Jere Ryckman, Judge

Representing Appellants (Plaintiffs): Richard A. Mincer of Hirst & Applegate, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellees (Defendants): Tracy J. Copenhaver and Scott E. Kolpitcke of Copenhaver, Kath, Kitchen & Kolpitcke, LLC, Powell, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Copenhaver.

Date of Decision: January 11, 2006

Issues: Whether the WGCA excepts Park County’s conduct with respect to placing necessary signage on County Road 8VC (Clark’s Ford Canyon Road) from the general rule of immunity.

Holdings: This case is an appeal from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Park County on its theory that it was immune from liability because of the application of the WGCA. Summary judgments are reviewed without according any deference to the district court’s decisions on issues of law. The result in the instant case is controlled by the WGCA, and those statutes establish that immunity is the rule and liability is the exception. Statutory construction is a question of law, so the standard of review is de novo. The Department of Transportation and Park County have been assigned the responsibility to provide proper road signage. The Court construed the plain language of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-39-108(a) as written and in accordance with the applicable standard of review and deemed the statute unambiguous insofar as the issue raised in the instant case. Providing traffic control devices on county highways is not a public service for which immunity has been waived by the WGCA. The Court construed the WGCA to be a “close-ended tort claims act” meaning that unless the claim falls within the statutory exceptions, it will be barred. Inadequate highway signage, if it should rise to the level of alleged negligence, constitutes a defect in the plan or design of a highway or the proper maintenance of a highway and thus is specifically excepted from any waiver of immunity contained in the WGCA.

The district court's order granting summary judgment is affirmed.

C.J. Hill delivered the opinion for the court.

Link to the case: http://tinyurl.com/c9r6t .