Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 1-17-102 (2026)

Request for hearing when property seized under

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
execution.

     (a) Except as provided in subsection (e) of this section,
a person, other than a corporate entity, against whom a money
judgment has been entered and whose property is seized under
execution is entitled to a hearing within five (5) days,
excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, after the court
receives the person's written request for a hearing to determine
if the property seized is exempt from execution. The person
whose property is seized shall file a written request for a
hearing with the clerk of court within ten (10) days after
seizure of his property.

     (b) Except where the judgment is solely against corporate
entities, the court shall attach to every money judgment a
notice containing the following information:

"You are informed that since the judgment is entered the
prevailing party may proceed to seize your property, funds or
wages by execution or garnishment. In that event you may be
entitled to the following exemptions:
          (i) Social security benefits pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
407 and supplemental security income;

          (ii)    Veteran's benefits;

          (iii)    Black lung benefits;

          (iv) Personal opportunities with employment
responsibilities (POWER) payments;

          (v) Federal civil service and state retirement system
benefits as provided in 5 U.S.C. 8346 and W.S. 9-3-426, 9-3-620,
9-3-712 and 15-5-313;

          (vi)    Worker's compensation benefits;

          (vii)    Unemployment compensation benefits;

          (viii) A portion of wages as provided in W.S.
1-15-408, or in the case of consumer credit sales, leases or
loans, as provided by W.S. 40-14-505;

          (ix) Homestead, personal articles and articles used
for carrying on a trade or business to the extent provided by
W.S. 1-20-101 through 1-20-111;

          (x)    Other exemptions as provided by law.

To assert your right to any of the foregoing exemptions you
shall file a written request with the clerk of court within ten
(10) days after seizure of your property, funds or wages. If you
fail to make a written request for a hearing and claim one (1)
or more of the foregoing exemptions within ten (10) days after
seizure of your property, funds or wages, you may waive or lose
your right to claim the exemptions."

     (c) The notice provided in this section shall be sent to
the last known address of the judgment debtor by the clerk of
court upon the request of any person before any property of the
judgment debtor is seized by execution or garnishment.

     (d) A copy of the money judgment together with the
exemption information shall be transmitted by the court by first
class United States mail, with the postage prepaid in envelopes
furnished and properly addressed by the prevailing party.
     (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a
judgment debtor who is served with a writ of continuing
garnishment under W.S. 1-15-506 shall file objections to the
continuing garnishment and receive a hearing on his objections
as provided by W.S. 1-15-507 and 1-15-508.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1987–2012 · leading case: McManaman v. McManaman, 2002 WY 128 (Wyo. 2002).
McManaman v. McManaman, 2002 WY 128 (Wyo. 2002). · cites it 9× “He contends that these orders are erroneous under Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 1-17-102 (b) and 1-15-102(a)(vi).”
Lingle State Bank of Lingle v. Podolak, 740 P.2d 392 (Wyo. 1987). “The majority are correct in that "earnings" is generally intended to cover more than wages.”
Wilcox v. Magill, 468 F. App'x 849 (10th Cir. 2012). “See *854 Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-17-102 (affording judgment debtor ten days to request a hearing to claim an exemption in seized property).”
— Wyo. Stat. § 1-17-102(b) — 2 cases
Lingle State Bank of Lingle v. Podolak, 740 P.2d 392 (Wyo. 1987). “The majority are correct in that "earnings" is generally intended to cover more than wages.”
McManaman v. McManaman, 2002 WY 128 (Wyo. 2002). “He contends that these orders are erroneous under Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 1-17-102 (b) and 1-15-102(a)(vi).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.