Summary 2013 WY 69

Summary of Decision June 5, 2013

Justice Voigt delivered the opinion for the Court. Reversed.

Case Name: TRINITY ST. JOHN a/k/a TRINITY POPE v. JOSHUA G. WAGNER, DDS, PC, d/b/a DENTAL CARE OF JACKSON HOLE

Docket Number: S-12-0188

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

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

Representing Appellant: Ryan R. Shaffer and Robert L. Stepans of Meyer, Shaffer & Stepans, PLLP, Jackson, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Shaffer.

Representing Appellee: Lena K. Moeller and Jodanna L. Haskins of White & Steele, P.C., Denver, Colorado. Argument by Ms. Haskins.

Date of Decision: June 5, 2013

Facts: Trinity St. John (the appellant), sought dental care from Dr. Joshua Wagner (the appellee). Following a claim by the appellee alleging breach of contract, the appellant responded with a number of counterclaims, including a claim based on the Wyoming Consumer Protection Act (WCPA). The district court dismissed all of the appellant’s claims, ruling that they were time barred by the statute of limitations. The appellant now appeals the dismissal of her WCPA claim.

Issues: Is a WCPA claim alleging unfair and deceptive trade practices by a dentist subject to Wyoming’s two-year professional malpractice statute of limitations?

Holdings: The appellant’s WCPA claim alleges that the appellee committed unfair and deceptive trade practices by compelling the appellant to obtain a credit card from a particular credit card company to settle her account. Such a claim is not based on the rendering of professional or health care services and, therefore, the two-year statute of limitations for professional malpractice is inapplicable. We reverse the district court’s order of dismissal and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

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]

Summary 2007 WY 132

Summary of Decision issued August 16, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

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

Case Name: Vollan v. State

Citation: 2007 WY 132

Docket Number: 06-275

Appeal from the District Court of Big Horn County, the Honorable Steven R. Cranfill, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): W. Keith Goody of Alpine, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Patrick J. Crank, Attorney General; Michael L. Hubbard, Deputy Attorney General; Ryan Schelhaas, Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Kennard F. Nelson, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

Issue: Whether Appellant’s denturist practice in Basin, Wyoming is conducted in violation of Wyoming Statutes barring individuals from practicing dentistry without a license.

Facts/Discussion: The district court granted a summary judgment in favor of the Wyoming Board of Dental Examiners (the Board) against Appellant.

Standard of Review: Summary judgment is appropriate when no genuine issue as to any material fact exists and the prevailing party is entitled to have a judgment as a matter of law.
The Court reviewed Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 33-15-114 and § 33-15-128(a)(ii) which defines dentistry as “the healing art practiced by a dentist which is concerned with the examination, diagnosis, treatment, planning and care of conditions within the human oral cavity and its adjacent tissues and structures.” Appellant relied on the Court’s decisions in Paravecchio v. Memorial Hosp. of Laramie Co.; Hahn v. State and State v. Catellier to support his argument that his practice as a denturist foes not violate Wyoming law. The Court noted his argument ignored the fact that his practice violates the clear language of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 33-15-114.

Holding: Appellant admitted he personally examined his customers, created their dentures, and later adjusted those dentures if necessary. A person is deemed to be practicing dentistry if he or she creates oral prosthetics, places them in the mouth or adjusts them after placement. Appellant was practicing dentistry in multiple ways under the statute. The district court’s order granting the Board a summary judgment and enjoining Appellant from practicing dentistry without a license was affirmed.

Affirmed.

C.J. Voigt delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/22b96o .