Summary 2006 WY 57

Summary of Decision issued May 11, 2006

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion 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 using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library for assistance.]

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

Case Name: Cantrell v. Sweetwater County School District No. 2

Citation: 2006 WY 57

Docket Number: 05-215

Appeal from the District Court of Sweetwater County, the Honorable Jere A. Ryckman, Judge.

Representing Appellants (Plaintiffs): Richard Honaker of Honaker Law Offices, LC, Rock Springs, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Defendant): Ford T. Bussart and William B. Payne of Bussart, West & Tyler, PC, Rock Springs, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Bussart.

Date of Decision: May 11, 2006

Issue: Whether a verified affidavit, signed under oath by the claimants, satisfies the requirement of Article 16, § 7 of the Wyoming Constitution that claims against governmental entities be “certified to under the penalty of perjury”.

Holding: The parents of a now-ten-year-old boy appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their complaint against a school district alleging injuries suffered by the boy on school property for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court concluded that the procedure of a signed notarized affidavit without the language of “certified to under penalty of perjury” did not give them subject matter jurisdiction in the case. Subject matter jurisdiction and the district court’s interpretation and application of the Wyoming Constitution are questions of law that are reviewed de novo. In construing constitutional provisions, the Court follows the same rules that govern the construction of statutes and are guided by the intent of the drafters. The Court has repeatedly held that Article 16, § 7 applies to claims presented under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act, Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 1-39-101 and that the district court does not have subject matter jurisdiction in the case of a governmental claim that does not meet constitutional requirements. In giving meaning to statutes and constitutional provisions, the Court endeavors to find the reasonable intent of the drafters. If it is acceptable to state that the facts supporting a claim are true, it certainly must be acceptable to swear that those facts are true. The Court concluded that if a governmental claim is supported only by certificate, that certificate must be accompanied by the words “under penalty of perjury” but that a claim may be supported by verified affidavit without inclusion of those words. Compliance exceeding the constitutional language was sufficient.

The Court reversed and remanded.

J. Voigt delivered the opinion for the court.

Link to the case: http://tinyurl.com/l8tma .