first prong test in Wyoming

2025Co., LLC, 2025 WY 15, ¶ 59 , 562 P.3d 1286 , 1301 (Wyo. 2025). “[T]he central purpose of Rule 60(a) is to effectuate the contemporaneous intent of the court and to ensure that the judgment reflects that intent.” Stone, 2023 WY 21, ¶ 8 , 525 P.3d at 636 (quoting Snyder v. Snyder, 2021 WY 101, ¶ 12 , 495 P.3d 876 , 879 (Wyo. 2021)).

2025Co., LLC, 2025 WY 15, ¶ 59 , 562 P.3d 1286 , 1301 (Wyo. 2025). “[T]he central purpose of Rule 60(a) is to effectuate the contemporaneous intent of the court and to ensure that the judgment reflects that intent.” Stone, 2023 WY 21, ¶ 8 , 525 P.3d at 636 (quoting Snyder v. Snyder, 2021 WY 101, ¶ 12 , 495 P.3d 876 , 879 (Wyo. 2021)).

2025Stone v. Stone, 2023 WY 21, ¶ 9 , 525 P.3d 634 , 636-37 (Wyo. 2023) (citations omitted). [¶15] With regard to the first prong of this test, “[a] clerical error is a mistake or omission of a mechanical nature apparent on the face of the record that prevents the judgment as entered from accurately reflecting the judgment that was rendered.” Chesapeake Expl., LLC v. Morton Prod.

2025Stone v. Stone, 2023 WY 21, ¶ 9 , 525 P.3d 634 , 636-37 (Wyo. 2023) (citations omitted). [¶15] With regard to the first prong of this test, “[a] clerical error is a mistake or omission of a mechanical nature apparent on the face of the record that prevents the judgment as entered from accurately reflecting the judgment that was rendered.” Chesapeake Expl., LLC v. Morton Prod.

2025Co., LLC, 2025 WY 15, ¶ 59 , 562 P.3d 1286 , 1301 (Wyo. 2025). “[T]he central purpose of Rule 60(a) is to effectuate the contemporaneous intent of the court and to ensure that the judgment reflects that intent.” Stone, 2023 WY 21, ¶ 8 , 525 P.3d at 636 (quoting Snyder v. Snyder, 2021 WY 101, ¶ 12 , 495 P.3d 876 , 879 (Wyo. 2021)).

2023As discussed above, to establish plain error, Mr. Berry “must show (1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; (2) a violation of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and (3) he was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.” Anderson, 2022 WY 119, ¶ 35 , 517 P.3d at 593 (quoting Ingersoll, 2022 WY 74, ¶ 9 , 511 P.3d at 484 ). [¶68] In this case, Mr. Berry cannot satisfy the first prong of the test, because the record does not clearly reflect the alleged error.

2023As discussed above, to establish plain error, Mr. Berry “must show (1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; (2) a violation of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and (3) he was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.” Anderson, 2022 WY 119, ¶ 35 , 517 P.3d at 593 (quoting Ingersoll, 2022 WY 74, ¶ 9 , 511 P.3d at 484 ). [¶68] In this case, Mr. Berry cannot satisfy the first prong of the test, because the record does not clearly reflect the alleged error.

2023As discussed above, to establish plain error, Mr. Berry “must show (1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; (2) a violation of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and (3) he was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.” Anderson, 2022 WY 119, ¶ 35 , 517 P.3d at 593 (quoting Ingersoll, 2022 WY 74, ¶ 9 , 511 P.3d at 484 ). [¶68] In this case, Mr. Berry cannot satisfy the first prong of the test, because the record does not clearly reflect the alleged error.

2023As discussed above, to establish plain error, Mr. Berry “must show (1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; (2) a violation of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and (3) he was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice.” Anderson, 2022 WY 119, ¶ 35 , 517 P.3d at 593 (quoting Ingersoll, 2022 WY 74, ¶ 9 , 511 P.3d at 484 ). [¶68] In this case, Mr. Berry cannot satisfy the first prong of the test, because the record does not clearly reflect the alleged error.

2012A dispute falls into this special category, the Court stated, and remains live if "(1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subjected to the same action again." Id., citing Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149 , 96 S.Ct. 347, 349 , 46 L.Ed.2d 350 (1975) (per curiam). [¶ 103] Applying the first prong of this test, the Court concluded the challenged action, father's imprisonment, was in its duration too short to be fully litigated t

2012A dispute falls into this special category, the Court stated, and remains live if "(1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subjected to the same action again." Id., citing Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149 , 96 S.Ct. 347, 349 , 46 L.Ed.2d 350 (1975) (per curiam). [T103] Applying the first prong of this test, the Court concluded the challenged action, father's imprisonment, was in its duration too short to be fully litigated th

2012A dispute falls into this special category, the Court stated, and remains live if "(1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subjected to the same action again." Id., citing Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149 , 96 S.Ct. 347, 349 , 46 L.Ed.2d 350 (1975) (per curiam). [¶ 103] Applying the first prong of this test, the Court concluded the challenged action, father's imprisonment, was in its duration too short to be fully litigated t

2012A dispute falls into this special category, the Court stated, and remains live if "(1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subjected to the same action again." Id., citing Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149 , 96 S.Ct. 347, 349 , 46 L.Ed.2d 350 (1975) (per curiam). [¶ 103] Applying the first prong of this test, the Court concluded the challenged action, father's imprisonment, was in its duration too short to be fully litigated t

2004Id.

2003Robinson, 10 P.3d at 1137 . [¶ 37] The Greenwalts’ contentions cannot survive this first prong of the test.

2003Robinson, 10 P.3d at 1137 . [ถ 37] The Greenwalts' contentions cannot survive this first prong of the test.

1991Appellant’s challenge fails, however, to pass the second portion of the test for plain error, which requires that the party claiming plain error must establish that “a clear and unequivocal rule of law was violated.” Id. at 1164 .

1991Appellant's challenge fails, however, to pass the second portion of the test for plain error, which requires that the party claiming plain error must establish that "a clear and unequivocal rule of law was violated." Id. at 1164 .