Summary 2006 WY 98

Summary of Decision issued August 7, 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: Ray v. St. Vincent Healthcare, Inc.; Johnson County, WY; Board of County Commissioners of Johnson County, WY; and the Johnson County Sheriff’s Dep’t.

Citation: 2006 WY 98

Docket Number: 05-235

Petition for Writ of Review

Representing Petitioner: R. Douglas Dumbrill and Nathan S. McLeland of Lubnau, Bailey & Dumbrill, P.C., Gillette, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. McLeland.

For Respondents Johnson County, Wyoming, The Board of County Commissioners of Johnson County, Wyoming and the Johnson County Sheriff’s Dept.: Greg L. Goddard of Goddard, Wages & Vogel, Buffalo, Wyoming.

For Respondent St. Vincent Healthcare, Inc.: No appearance.

Issue: Whether the appropriate statute of limitations for 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims is two (2) years pursuant to W.S. § 1-3-115 or four (4) years pursuant to Sullivan v. Bailiff, and whether Appellant’s Motion to Amend Cross-Claim and Third Party Complaint Pursuant to W.R.C.P. 15 was timely filed.

Holding: St. Vincent Healthcare, Inc. sued Johnson County, Wyoming and its board of commissioners in order to recover medical expenses incurred in treating Jeremy Ray. In order to avoid a dismissal of the complaint, St. Vincent caused Ray to be joined as a defendant. Ray initially filed an answer, cross-claim, and third party complaint, but later sought to amend that filing to include a federal civil rights complaint against the Johnson County Sheriffs. The district court denied Ray’s motion and Ray sought a writ of review from the Court.
Standard of Review: A motion to amend a pleading under W.R.C.P. 15(a) “shall be freely given when justice so requires.” A district court’s decision to grant or deny a motion to amend will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. Application of a statute of limitations is a question of law which the Court reviews de novo.
Based on Lafferty, the district court in the instant case determined that Ray filed his claim outside of the two-year statute of limitations and it was therefore, time barred. The issue on this writ of review is whether Lafferty remains good law. After the Court’s decision in Lafferty, the United States Supreme Court decided Wilson v. Garcia. Based on the holding in Wilson, it is clear that Lafferty is no longer valid. In Lafferty, the Court held that Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-3-115 applied to §1983 claims. The clear rule in Wilson is that such statutes of limitations do not apply and that a state’s personal injury statute must be uniformly applied in § 1983 cases. Therefore the proper statute of limitations to apply in Wyoming state courts for § 1983 claims is the four-year limitations period contained in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-3-105(a)(iv)(C) and not the two-year period in § 1-3-115. Because less than three years passed between the date of Ray’s injuries and his attempt to file the § 1983 claim, that claim fell within the four-year statute of limitations and was timely.
In the respondents’ brief, Johnson County and the Sheriff’s Dept. argued that the Court could affirm the district court’s denial of Ray’s motion to dismiss because Ray did not properly allege compliance with the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act and Article 16, § 7 of the Wyoming Constitution in Ray’s proposed amended complaint, cross-claim and counter-claim. However, the question was not whether the order should be affirmed or denied but whether the district court erred in applying the two-year statute of limitations in Wyo. Stat. Ann. §1-3-115. The district court did not rule on the matter so the Court did not address the issue because they did not grant the writ of review to determine that question.

C.J. Voigt delivered the opinion for the Court.

Reversed and remanded.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/he6m2 .