Friday, August 02, 2013

Summary 2013 WY 91

Summary of Decision July 24, 2013

Justice Burke delivered the opinion for the Court. Reversed and remanded.

Case Name: STATE OF WYOMING ex rel., DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES v. LISA KISLING

Docket Number: S-12-0256

URL: http://www.courts.state.wy.us/Opinions.aspx

Appeal from the District Court of Fremont County, the Honorable Timothy C. Day, Judge

Representing Appellant: Gregory A. Phillips, Attorney General; Robin Sessions Cooley, Deputy Attorney General. Argument by Ms. Cooley.

Representing Appellee: John M. Burman, Director, Ethan Doak and Matthew Pennell, Student Interns, University of Wyoming, College of Law Legal Services Program. Argument by Mr. Doak.

Date of Decision: July 24, 2013

Facts: Appellant, the Department of Family Services (Department), denied child care assistance benefits to Appellee, Lisa Kisling, because her participation in a graduate-level educational program rendered her ineligible for receipt of such benefits. The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) upheld the denial of benefits after a contested case hearing. Ms. Kisling petitioned for review of that decision in the district court, and the district court reversed the OAH’s decision after finding that the Department was equitably estopped from denying benefits to Ms. Kisling. The Department appeals from the district court’s order, contending that the issue of estoppel was not raised before the OAH, and that the district court should not have considered it.

Issues: The Department presents three issues for our review, which we discuss in the following order: Did the Department correctly conclude, as a matter of law, that its statutes and rules precluded Ms. Kisling from receiving child care assistance benefits while she attended law school? Did the district court err when it considered the issue of equitable estoppel on review of the Department’s decision? Did the district court err when it determined that the Department was equitably estopped from terminating, and thereafter denying, Ms. Kisling benefits while she attended law school? Ms. Kisling states the issues in a substantially similar manner.

Holdings: The district court’s order reversing the OAH’s decision upholding the Department’s denial of benefits is reversed, and we remand to the district court with instructions that an order be entered affirming the OAH’s decision.

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

[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. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter 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]

No comments:

Check out our tags in a cloud (from Wordle)!