Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hodson v. Sturgeon

Supreme Court of Wyoming

December 15, 2017

RICHARD W. HODSON, Appellant (Plaintiff),
v.
JANET L. STURGEON, Appellee (Defendant).

         Appeal from the District Court of Park County The Honorable Steven R. Cranfill, Judge

          Representing Appellant: Pro se.

          Representing Appellee: Larry B. Jones of Simpson, Kepler & Edwards, LLC, the Cody, Wyoming division of Burg Simpson Eldredge Hersh and Jardine, P.C., Cody, Wyoming.

          Before BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.

          KAUTZ, J.

         [¶1] Richard W. Hodson challenges the district court's order which recognized and adopted the settlement he reached with Janet L. Sturgeon. In that settlement, the parties agreed to resolve their pending lawsuit and divide their jointly owned property. Because Mr. Hodson failed to comply with the Wyoming Rules of Appellate Procedure, we summarily affirm the district court's order and grant Ms. Sturgeon's request for an award of costs and attorney fees.

         FACTS

         [¶2] Mr. Hodson sued Ms. Sturgeon claiming breach of contract and seeking a dissolution of partnership. His Complaint also alleged that the parties jointly owned property. He asserted the district court should set Ms. Sturgeon's interest in that property over to him pursuant to a contract. On the day of trial, the parties' attorneys told the district court that they had settled the case. They recited the terms of the settlement and submitted a written settlement agreement signed by both parties. The district court entered an order adopting the settlement. Mr. Hodson timely filed a notice of appeal challenging that order.

         DISCUSSION

         [¶3] Mr. Hodson is acting pro se in this appeal.

A pro se litigant is entitled to some leniency from the stringent standards applied to formal pleadings drafted by attorneys. However, there must be a reasonable adherence to the procedural rules and requirements of the court. Hodgins v. State, 1 P.3d 1259, 1262 (Wyo. 2000). This Court will impose sanctions including, but not limited to, summary affirmance, pursuant to W.R.A.P. 1.03 on pro se litigants who fail to comply with these rules. Id. at 1262-63.

Young v. State, 2002 WY 68, ¶ 9, 46 P.3d 295, 297 (Wyo. 2002). Mr. Hodson has not complied with our rules of appellate procedure. Consequently, we summarily affirm the district court's order.

         [¶4] W.R.A.P. 7.01(e)(2), (f) and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.