Summary 2008 WY 40

Summary of Decision issued April 8, 2008

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

Case Name: Kruckenberg v. Ding Masters, Inc.

Citation: 2008 WY 40

Docket Number: S-07-0084

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, the Honorable Edward L. Grant, Judge

Representing Appellants (Plaintiffs): Ron G. Pretty, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Defendant): Robert Carl Jarosh and Richard Grant Schneebeck, of Hirst & Appelgate, PC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Facts/Discussion: Kruckenberg and Leif appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in Ding Masters’ favor.
Jurisdiction: The summary judgment in Ding Masters’ favor affected a substantial right but it did not determine the action because Appellants still maintained unresolved claims against several defendants. The order granting summary judgment was an interlocutory order. It merged with the Order of Dismissal with Prejudice which was the final order in Appellants’ case. Appellants identified and attached the Order of Dismissal with Prejudice to their Notice of Appeal and satisfied the requirements.
Opportunity to Respond: Appellants contended that they were not afforded an opportunity to respond to Ding Masters’ motion for summary judgment. They also asserted that the Court’s prior decisions interpreting W.R.C.P. 56 required the district court to hold a hearing or to inform Appellants before ruling that no hearing would be held. W.R.C.P. 6(c) notified Appellants that they must respond to the summary judgment motion within 20 days. They failed to do so. The rule notified Appellants that the district court could in its discretion rule on the motion without a hearing. Furthermore, W.R.C.P. 56(e) required that, in the absence of a response from the non-moving party, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against the adverse party.
Summary Judgment: The summary judgment movant has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case with admissible evidence. Once that is accomplished the burden shifts to the opposing party to present specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue of material fact. Ding Masters submitted affidavits, deposition excerpts, and other materials in support of its motion. Appellants filed no response in opposition and the Court concluded there was no genuine issue of material fact.

Holding: Ding Masters successfully presented a prima facie case that it was entitled to summary judgment. Kruckenberg and Leif did not come forward with evidentiary materials to counter that case, nor did they demonstrate that Ding Masters’ own materials raised genuine issues of material fact.

Affirmed.

J. Burke delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/64dkd8 .

[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.]