Wyoming Statutes
Wyo. Stat. § 35-17-105 (2026)
Information of review organizations to be
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WY-LEGwyoleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
confidential and privileged. All reports, findings, proceedings and data of the professional standard review organizations is confidential and privileged, and is not subject to discovery or introduction into evidence in any civil action, and no person who is in attendance at a meeting of the organization shall be permitted or required to testify in any civil action as to any evidence or other matters produced or presented during the proceedings of the organization or as to any findings, recommendations, evaluations, opinions or other actions of the organization or any members thereof. However, information, documents or other records otherwise available from original sources are not to be construed as immune from discovery or use in any civil action merely because they were presented during proceedings of the organization, nor should any person who testifies before the organization or who is a member of the organization be prevented from testifying as to matters within his knowledge, but that witness cannot be asked about his testimony before the organization or opinions formed by him as a result of proceedings of the organization.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1996–2019 · leading case: Nalder v. West Park Hosp., 254 F.3d 1168 (10th Cir. 2001).
Nalder v. West Park Hosp., 254 F.3d 1168 (10th Cir. 2001). “” Wyo. Stat. § 35-17-105; see also id. § 35-17-101 (defining terms).”
Harston v. Campbell Cnty. Mem'l Hosp., 913 P.2d 870 (Wyo. 1996). “CCMH contended this information was confidential and privileged pursuant to the provisions of Wyo.Stat. § 35-17-105 (1994): All reports, findings, proceedings and data of the professional standard review organizations is confidential and privileged, and is not subject to…”
Homeland Ins. Co. of New York v. Powell Hosp. Dist. No 1 (D. Wyo. 2019). “§ 35-2-606, 609 and W.S. § 35-17-105; § 35-2-910, 35-2-103; W.”
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.