Case Title: Dee v. Laramie County

Citation: 

Docket Number: 83-39

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 1983-07-14T00:00:00Z

Document:
Dee v. Laramie County1983 WY 75666 P.2d 957Case Number: 83-39Case Number: 83-39Decided: 07/14/1983Supreme Court of Wyoming
MICHAEL J. DEE, APPELLANT 
(PLAINTIFF),

v.

LARAMIE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF CHEYENNE, APPELLEES 
(DEFENDANTS).

Appeal from the District 
Court, LaramieCounty, Alan B. Johnson, 
J.

Michael J. Dee, 
pro se.

Vincent J. Horn, 
Jr., Cheyenne, 
for appellees.

Before ROONEY, C.J., and RAPER*, THOMAS, ROSE and BROWN, 
JJ.

* Retired June 13, 1983, 
but continued to participate in the decision of the court in this case pursuant 
to order of the court entered June 13, 1983.

ROONEY, Chief 
Justice.

[¶1.]     Appellant, acting pro 
se, appeals from the district court's order dismissing with prejudice his 
complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.1

[¶2.]     We affirm the dismissal 
of the complaint but for the reason that the district court did not have 
jurisdiction over the subject matter.2

[¶3.]     In December 1982, 
appellant filed an action against appellees alleging that somehow appellees, 
acting through their respective law enforcement agencies, had violated 
appellant's constitutional rights or had committed malfeasance by failing to 
arrest appellant when they first learned that he was growing marijuana, a 
controlled substance. 

[¶4.]     The complaint was 
unartfully drawn3 and can be characterized as 
sounding in tort, if any claim for relief is stated at all. However, it is clear 
in that the action is brought against two governmental entities, as that term is 
defined in § 1-39-103, W.S. 1977, Cum.Supp. 1983.4

[¶5.]     The Wyoming Governmental 
Claims Act, § 1-39-101, et seq., W.S. 1977, Cum.Supp. 1983, sets forth the 
exclusive remedy against a governmental entity.5 It requires the submission of a 
timely claim to the governmental entity prior to bringing an action on such 
claim. Section 1-39-113, W.S. 1977, Cum.Supp. 1983, 
provides:

"(a) No action shall be 
brought under this act against a governmental entity unless the claim upon which 
the action is based is presented to the entity as an itemized statement in 
writing within two (2) years of the date of the alleged act, error or omission, 
except that a cause of action may be instituted not more than two (2) years 
after discovery of the alleged act, error or omission, if the claimant can 
establish that the alleged act, error or omission was:

"(i) Not reasonably 
discoverable within a two (2) year period; or

"(ii) The claimant failed 
to discover the alleged act, error or omission within the two (2) year period 
despite the exercise of due diligence.

"(b) The claim shall 
state:

"(i) The time, place and 
circumstances of the alleged loss or injury including the name of the public 
employee involved, if known;

"(ii) The name, address 
and residence of the claimant and his representative or attorney, if any; 
and

"(iii) The amount of 
compensation or other relief demanded.

"(c) Claims against the 
state shall be presented to the state auditor who shall forward a copy of the 
claim to the insurance claims division of the department of administration and 
fiscal control. Claims against any other governmental entity shall be filed at 
the business office of that entity in duplicate and a copy of the claim shall be 
forwarded by the entity to the secretary of state for informational purposes. 
Failure to file the claim with the secretary of state shall not invalidate the 
claim. In the case of claims against local governments the claim submitted need 
not be acted upon by the entity prior to suit."

[¶6.]     In Board of Trustees of University of Wyoming 
v. Bell, Wyo., 662 P.2d 410 (1983), the claim requirement of § 1-39-113(a), 
supra, was discussed fully in connection with an employee's action against the 
university which could be characterized as sounding in tort and contract. After 
discussing the general law regarding the presentation of a claim as a condition 
precedent to commencing an action against a governmental entity, we 
said:

"The same result must be 
reached under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act, supra, as is reached under 
the general law even though the statute is not explicit with respect to whether 
the filing of a claim is a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit. It would be 
incongruous for the same result not to attach to the failure to file a claim 
under § 1-39-113, W.S. 1977 (Cum.Supp. 1982), and we hold that the failure to file a claim 
under that statute results in a district court having no jurisdiction over an 
action which is brought if the complaint fails to allege the filing of the claim 
pursuant to statute." (Emphasis added.) 662 P.2d  at 
415.

[¶7.]     The complaint in this 
case fails to allege that a claim was filed with either of the appellees prior 
to institution of the action.6 Such failure to allege the 
compliance with a condition precedent to instituting an action deprives the 
district court of subject matter jurisdiction. Board of Trustees of University of Wyoming 
v. Bell, supra.

[¶8.]     For this reason, the 
dismissal of the complaint by the trial court is affirmed.

1 Appellant lists eleven 
issues in his appellate brief, none of which are argued cogently and relevantly. 
If the issue upon which the trial court determined the matter, i.e. whether or 
not appellant had pleaded sufficient operative facts to entitle him to relief if 
proven (see Johnson v. Aetna Casualty 
& Surety Co. of Hartford, Conn., Wyo., 608 P.2d 1299, 1302 (1980)), is 
addressed in appellant's brief at all, it is done only 
tangentially.

2 The parties do not argue 
the jurisdictional question, but such may be considered by the court on its own 
volition at any stage of the proceedings. Matter of Estate of Harrington, Wyo., 648 P.2d 556, 559 (1982); and Jackson v. State, Wyo., 547 P.2d 1203, 1205 
(1976).

3 The complaint did not 
comply with the requirements of Rule 10(b), W.R.C.P.

4 Section 1-39-103, W.S. 
1977, Cum.Supp. 1983, provides in pertinent part:

"(a) As used in this 
act:

"(i) `Governmental 
entity' means the state, University of Wyoming or any local 
government;

"(ii) `Local government' 
means cities and towns, counties, school districts, joint powers boards, airport 
boards, public corporations, community college districts, special districts and 
their governing bodies, all political subdivisions of the state, and their 
agencies, instrumentalities and institutions; * * *"

5 Section 1-39-116(a), 
W.S. 1977, Cum.Supp. 1983, provides:

"(a) The remedy against a 
governmental entity as provided by this act is exclusive, and no other claim, 
civil action or proceeding for damages, by reason of the same transaction or 
occurrence which was the subject matter of the original claim, civil action or 
proceeding may be brought against the governmental entity. No rights of a 
governmental entity to contribution, indemnity or subrogation shall be impaired 
by this section. Nothing in this section prohibits any proceedings for mandamus, 
prohibition, habeas corpus, injunction or quo warranto."

6 There is nothing in the 
record to reflect that such a claim was filed.