Summary
The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Bruce Florquist and the City of Rawlins in a tort action. The court held that a governmental claim under Wyoming Constitution article 16, section 7 must be signed by the claimant and certified under penalty of perjury, and that failure to satisfy those requirements deprived the district court of subject matter jurisdiction. The court also rejected arguments based on judicial estoppel, equitable estoppel, waiver, laches, substantial compliance, and law of the case.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a governmental claim under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act must be signed by the claimant.
- Whether a governmental claim must be certified under penalty of perjury.
- Whether judicial estoppel barred the Beaulieus' arguments concerning the second claim.
- Whether equitable estoppel, waiver, or laches could save the defective claim.
- Whether substantial compliance could save the defective claim.
- Whether Beaulieu v. Florquist, 2001 WY 33, established law of the case preventing the defendants from challenging the second claim.
Holdings
- A claim against a governmental entity under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act must comply with article 16, section 7 of the Wyoming Constitution, including the requirements that it be signed by the claimant and certified under penalty of perjury. An attorney's signature does not satisfy those requirements.
- A proper governmental claim is a condition precedent to suit, and the district court does not obtain subject matter jurisdiction until the claim satisfies both statutory filing requirements and the constitutional signature and certification requirements. Complaints filed after publication of this opinion must allege compliance with those constitutional requirements as well as statutory filing requirements.
- Judicial estoppel does not bar the Beaulieus from arguing that an attorney's signature could satisfy the constitutional signature requirement because the issue presents a legal conclusion rather than inconsistent factual positions.
- The defective claim was not saved by equitable estoppel, waiver, laches, or substantial compliance.
- The law-of-the-case doctrine does not prevent the defendants from challenging the validity of the second governmental claim because the first appeal addressed the first claim, not the second.
Key quotations
“We now hold, however, that the complaint must also allege compliance with the signature and certification requirements of the state constitution.” (86 P.3d at 868-869)
“The Governmental Claim signed by the Beaulieus' attorney and filed with the City of Rawlins did not meet the signature and certification requirements of Wyo. Const. art. 16, § 7, and was therefore not a valid claim.” (86 P.3d at 872)
Factual background
On December 19, 1996, a vehicle driven by Rawlins city employee Bruce Florquist struck a vehicle occupied by William and April Beaulieu and their daughter. An unsigned notice of claim appeared in the Rawlins city attorney's office shortly thereafter. After receiving a settlement offer, the Beaulieus retained counsel, who filed a second claim with the city clerk on June 29, 1998; the claim was signed by the attorney but not by any claimant and was not certified under penalty of perjury.
Procedural history
After a vehicle driven by Rawlins employee Bruce Florquist struck the Beaulieus' vehicle, an initial unsigned notice of claim appeared in the city attorney's office. The Beaulieus later filed a second governmental claim, signed by their attorney but not by the claimants and not certified under penalty of perjury, and then filed suit. In the first appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court held that the initial notice was invalid. On remand, the district court granted renewed summary judgment to the defendants based on the defects in the second claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction; the Supreme Court affirmed.