Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wyoming courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Brandon Lee Jensen v. Margaret E. Milatzo-Jensengreen2 sentences2025Meehan-Greer, ¶ 25, 415 P.3d at 281 (citing Jensen v. Milatzo-Jenson, 2013 WY 27, ¶ 8 , 297 P.3d 768, 772 (Wyo. 2013)). 2025Meehan-Greer, ¶ 25, 415 P.3d at 281 (citing Jensen v. Milatzo-Jenson, 2013 WY 27, ¶ 8 , 297 P.3d 768, 772 (Wyo. 2013)). | 1 | 2 |
Bishop v. Bishopgreen2 sentences2022The district court does not properly acquire jurisdiction to reopen an existing custody order until there has been a showing of a substantial or material change of circumstances which outweigh[s] society’s interest in applying the doctrine of res judicata to a custody order.” Jacobson, ¶ 16, 426 P.3d at 820 (quoting Bishop v. Bishop, 2017 WY 130, ¶ 11 , 404 P.3d 1170, 1173 (Wyo. 2017)) (other citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶26] Once a material change of circumstances is established, the court turns to the second step of the analysis, which requires determination of whether modificati 2022The district court does not properly acquire jurisdiction to reopen an existing custody order until there has been a showing of a substantial or material change of circumstances which outweigh[s] society’s interest in applying the doctrine of res judicata to a custody order.” Jacobson, ¶ 16, 426 P.3d at 820 (quoting Bishop v. Bishop, 2017 WY 130, ¶ 11 , 404 P.3d 1170, 1173 (Wyo. 2017)) (other citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶26] Once a material change of circumstances is established, the court turns to the second step of the analysis, which requires determination of whether modificati | 1 | 2 |
Crawford v. Crawfordgreen1 sentence2025“A condition which existed when the divorce decree was entered is not a substantial or material change of circumstances that warrants modification of the decree.” Sorensen, 944 P.2d at 432 (citing Crawford v. Crawford, 828 P.2d 1192, 1193 (Wyo. 1992)). [¶21] If a material change of circumstances is established, the court then moves to the second step of the analysis, determining whether a modification is in the child’s best interests. | 1 | 1 |
Thorkildsen v. Beldengreen1 sentence2016See Thorkildsen, ¶ 10, 269 P.3d at 424 . | 1 | 1 |
Harold H. Dishman v. First Interstate Bankgreen1 sentence2016See Dishman, ¶ 14, 362 P.3d at 365 . [154] For the second step in its analysis, the district court correctly consulted § 1-14 126(b) and considered the listed factors to decide whether to adjust the fee either upward or downward to arrive at a reasonable amount. | 1 | 1 |
Sharon G. CONE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LONGMONT UNITED HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, a Colorado Corporation, Defendant-Appelleegreen1 sentence2007Instead, we will assume for the purposes of this appeal, that Mr. Rollins established a prima facie case of age discrimination. 2 See Cone, 14 F.3d at 530 (assuming a prima facie case of discrimination had been established even though the discharge element of the employee's case was problematic). [113] In the second step of the analysis, the employer is charged with showing a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its action. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Meehan-Greer v. Greer
green
2 sentences2025Meehan-Greer, ¶ 25, 415 P.3d at 281 (citing Jensen v. Milatzo-Jenson, 2013 WY 27, ¶ 8 , 297 P.3d 768, 772 (Wyo. 2013)). 2022Meehan-Greer, ¶ 25, 415 P.3d at 281 (citing Jensen, ¶ 8, 297 P.3d at 772 ). | 2 | 2022–2025 |
Kreuter v. Kreuter
green
1 sentence2025In re TLJ, ¶ 8, 129 P.3d at 876 (quoting Kreuter, 728 P.2d at 1130 ). [¶22] In this instance, the district court determined there had been no material change in circumstances and therefore did not move to the second step of the analysis. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Sorensen v. May
green
1 sentence2025“A condition which existed when the divorce decree was entered is not a substantial or material change of circumstances that warrants modification of the decree.” Sorensen, 944 P.2d at 432 (citing Crawford v. Crawford, 828 P.2d 1192, 1193 (Wyo. 1992)). [¶21] If a material change of circumstances is established, the court then moves to the second step of the analysis, determining whether a modification is in the child’s best interests. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Clh v. Mmj
green
1 sentence2025In re TLJ, ¶ 8, 129 P.3d at 876 (quoting Kreuter, 728 P.2d at 1130 ). [¶22] In this instance, the district court determined there had been no material change in circumstances and therefore did not move to the second step of the analysis. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Johnson v. Clifford
green
1 sentence2023Gutierrez v. Bradley, 2021 WY 139, ¶ 23 , 500 P.3d 984 , 989-90 (Wyo. 2021); Johnson, ¶ 11, 418 P.3d at 823 ; Bishop, ¶ 11, 404 P.3d at 1173 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Austin Gutierrez f/k/a Austin Bradley v. Jeffrey G. Bradley
neutral
1 sentence2023Gutierrez v. Bradley, 2021 WY 139, ¶ 23 , 500 P.3d 984 , 989-90 (Wyo. 2021); Johnson, ¶ 11, 418 P.3d at 823 ; Bishop, ¶ 11, 404 P.3d at 1173 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Jacobson v. Kidd
green
1 sentence2022The district court does not properly acquire jurisdiction to reopen an existing custody order until there has been a showing of a substantial or material change of circumstances which outweigh[s] society’s interest in applying the doctrine of res judicata to a custody order.” Jacobson, ¶ 16, 426 P.3d at 820 (quoting Bishop v. Bishop, 2017 WY 130, ¶ 11 , 404 P.3d 1170, 1173 (Wyo. 2017)) (other citations and quotation marks omitted). [¶26] Once a material change of circumstances is established, the court turns to the second step of the analysis, which requires determination of whether modificati | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Harley v. State
green
2 sentences2015In addition, juries are always instructed, as they were in this case, that the defendant is presumed innocent, and that this presumption remains until the jury is satisfied that the State has proved each and every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. 7 Although we do not believe that it would have been possible for a reasonable juror to do so after reading all of the instructions in this case, use of the word "presumption" to refer to an inference could lead to confusion in other situations. [¶ 24] Turning to the second step of the analysis, we must also determine "whether 2015This is so, because "if the presumption or inference is permissive only, then it must be demonstrated that it was invalid in the particular case." Harley, 737 P.2d at 755 ; see also Cnty. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
green
2 sentences2005The court then concluded that without on-site testing of the theories, the experts’ conclusions should not be admitted. [¶ 19] The first step of the two-step Daubert analysis and the four, non-exclusive *1279 factors suggested for determining whether an expert’s theories are scientifically reliable are “most relevant in the context of a new and novel scientific theory — asking if it has been tested, subjected to peer review and publication, etc.” and that “they do provide examples of the general kinds of issues a trial court need probe in light of its purpose of ensuring that an expert employs 2005The court then concluded that without on-site testing of the theories, the experts’ conclusions should not be admitted. [¶ 19] The first step of the two-step Daubert analysis and the four, non-exclusive *1279 factors suggested for determining whether an expert’s theories are scientifically reliable are “most relevant in the context of a new and novel scientific theory — asking if it has been tested, subjected to peer review and publication, etc.” and that “they do provide examples of the general kinds of issues a trial court need probe in light of its purpose of ensuring that an expert employs | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.