Wyoming Statutes
Wyo. Stat. § 9-11-103 (2026)
Discrimination against certain employees
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WY-LEGwyoleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
prohibited; civil action against employer.
(a) No state employer may discharge, discipline or
retaliate against an employee by unreasonably altering the
terms, location or conditions of employment because the employee
acting in good faith and within the scope of duties of
employment:
(i) Reports in writing to the employer what the
employee has reasonable cause to believe is a demonstration of
fraud, waste or gross mismanagement in state government office;
(ii) Reports in writing to the employer what the
employee has reasonable cause to believe is a violation of a
law, regulation, code or rule adopted under the laws of this
state or the United States;
(iii) Reports in writing to the employer what the
employee has reasonable cause to believe is a condition or
practice that would put at risk the health or safety of that
employee or any other individual;
(iv) Participates or is requested to participate in
any investigation, hearing or inquiry; or
(v) Has refused to carry out a directive which is
beyond the scope, terms and conditions of his employment that
would expose the employee or any individual to a condition
likely to result in serious injury or death, after having sought
and been unable to obtain a correction of the dangerous
condition from the employer.
(b) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to an
employee who has reported or caused to be reported a violation
or unsafe condition or practice, unless the employee has first
brought the alleged violation, condition or practice to the
attention of a person having supervisory authority over the
employee and has allowed the state employer a reasonable
opportunity to correct that violation, condition or practice.
Prior notice to a person having supervisory authority is not
required if the employee reasonably believes that the report may
not result in prompt correction of the violation, condition or
practice. In such cases, the employee shall report the
violation, condition or practice to the department or agency
director of the state entity with which he is employed or to the
office of the governor. In the event the alleged violation,
condition or practice occurred within the office of the
governor, the employee may report the violation, condition or
practice to the office of the secretary of state.
(c) Any employee who is discharged, disciplined or
otherwise penalized by a state employer in violation of this
section may after exhausting all available administrative
remedies, bring a civil action within ninety (90) days after the
date of the final administrative determination or within ninety
(90) days after the violation, whichever is later, in the
district court for the judicial district in which the violation
is alleged to have occurred or where the state employer has its
principal office. An employee's recovery from any action under
this section shall be limited to reinstatement of his previous
job, payment of back wages and re-establishment of employee
benefits to which he would have otherwise been entitled if the
violation had not occurred. In addition, the court may allow the
prevailing party his costs together with reasonable attorney's
fees to be taxed by the court. Any employee found to have
knowingly made a false report shall be subject to disciplinary
action by his employer up to and including dismissal.
(d) A state employer shall ensure that its employees are
aware of their rights under this chapter.Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 1979–2006 · leading case: Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006).
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006). “§ 75b(2)(b) (West 1999); Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 9-11-103 (b) (2003). [11] Kan.”
Emery v. City of Rawlins, 596 P.2d 675 (Wyo. 1979). “” § 9-11-103. In their appeal timely filed in the district court appellants said nothing about any violation of the public-meetings law but by motion filed almost two months later they asked the court to set aside the action of the council overruling their protests and also to…”
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.