Court Opinion

ID: 9632104
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:03:02.073081+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:29:39.666535
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice McINTYRE
(dissenting).
When this case was before us previously I was of the opinion plaintiff had not made out a case entitling her to damages. My views were expressed in a dissent. See Pangarova v. Nichols, Wyo., 419 P.2d 688, 698-704.
As stated in the majority opinion, the evidence on retrial was not substantially different from the evidence previously before us. Inasmuch as the reasons for my views were fully expressed in my previous dissent, it is not necessary to express them again. What I said in the former appeal is still applicable, and my views have not changed.