Hoblyn v. Johnson
Decision Date | 09 October 2002 |
Docket Number | No. 01-169.,01-169. |
Citation | 55 P.3d 1219,2002 WY 152 |
Parties | Gary HOBLYN and Michelle Hoblyn, Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. Margurette JOHNSON, Chuck Johnson, Matthew Wayne Davis, Loucin Port Davis, Officer Crumpton, Greg Bybee, Ken Peterson, the Laramie County Sheriff's Department and the State of Wyoming, Appellees (Defendants). |
Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Bernard Q. Phelan of Phelan-Watson Law Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming, Representing Appellants.
Misha E. Westby and Ryan T. Schelhaas of Hirst & Applegate, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming, Representing Appellees Johnson.
Curtis B. Buchhammer and Loretta R. Green of Buchhammer & Kehl, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming, Representing Appellees Davis.
Hoke MacMillan, Attorney General; John W. Renneisen, Deputy Attorney General; and John D. Rossetti, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Representing Appellees Crumpton, Bybee, and State of Wyoming.
Before HILL, C.J., and GOLDEN, LEHMAN,1 KITE, and VOIGT, JJ.
[¶ 1] The teenage daughter of Appellants Gary and Michelle Hoblyn (the parents) accused her father of abuse. While the charges were being investigated, the parents took the daughter to stay temporarily with her grandparents in Nebraska but would not permit her to take her horse. The daughter undertook efforts, with the assistance of a state brand inspector, to obtain possession of her horse. Though the father was later found not guilty of abuse, the daughter did not return home. The parents sued the grandparents, the neighbors, the brand inspector, the Laramie County sheriff's department, and others for various conspiracy and individual claims including tortious interference with the parent-child relationship, deprivation of constitutional rights under color of state law, intentional infliction of emotional distress, larceny, trespass, harassment, and defamation. The district court dismissed the tortuous interference claim against the grandparents for lack of jurisdiction, and it dismissed the remainder of the claims by summary judgment. We affirm.
[¶ 2] We rephrase the issues as follows:
[¶ 3] Pursuant to our standard of review for summary judgments, we consider the facts from the vantage point most favorable to the parents, as the party opposing the motions, awarding them all the favorable inferences which may be drawn from those facts. S & G Investors, LLC v. Blackley, 994 P.2d 941, 943 (Wyo.2000).
[¶ 4] In October 1998, the sixteen-year-old daughter accused her father of physical abuse. The Department of Family Services (DFS) suggested a "cooling off" period, and the parents took the daughter from Cheyenne to North Platte, Nebraska, to stay approximately one month with her paternal grandmother, Margurette Johnson, and step-grandfather, Chuck Johnson (the grandparents). The grandmother asked the parents to allow the daughter to have her horse while she stayed in Nebraska. They refused though the daughter was the horse's legal owner. The daughter contacted Matthew Davis, her neighbor from Cheyenne, for advice. Mr. Davis spoke with Greg Bybee, a state brand inspector, who apparently later contacted the daughter. On November 13, 1998, the grandparents drove the daughter to a truck stop near Burns, Wyoming, so she could meet with the brand inspector. Although the grandparents and Mr. Davis and his wife (the neighbors) were present at the truck stop, the daughter met with the brand inspector alone at a separate table. During the meeting, the daughter signed papers transferring ownership of her horse to Ken Peterson.
[¶ 5] At seven o'clock the next morning, the brand inspector and Deputies Fanning and Crumpton from the Laramie County sheriff's department went to the parents' Cheyenne home. The brand inspector had requested assistance from the sheriff's department, and the deputies were sent in response. Mr. Peterson also went to the parents' home with a pickup truck and a horse trailer. While everyone else waited on the county road off the property, Deputy Fanning knocked on the front door of the residence. No one answered, and Deputy Fanning joined the others on the county road to wait and see if anyone would appear. After approximately twenty to thirty minutes, the brand inspector entered the property from behind the residence and went to a fenced area with some outbuildings. He opened a wire gate, entered an enclosure, and identified a horse he found there as being the same horse the daughter had transferred to Mr. Peterson the night before. The brand inspector led the horse off the property and loaded it into the horse trailer, and Mr. Peterson drove away. Later that day, the brand inspector met Mr. Peterson at a welding shop and completed the paperwork transferring ownership of the horse back to the daughter. The neighbors then took the horse to the daughter in Nebraska.
[¶ 6] The father was criminally charged for allegedly hitting the daughter and found not guilty after a March 1999 jury trial.2 The neighbors kept in contact with the daughter and grandparents through personal visits, letters, and telephone calls. The grandparents brought the daughter to Cheyenne on several occasions to visit the neighbors and did not advise the parents. The daughter bought a truck from the neighbors, and the grandparents helped her purchase a horse trailer.
[¶ 7] The grandparents started temporary guardianship proceedings in Nebraska as required by the school district where the daughter was enrolled. The parents reportedly did not show up at the hearing, and the matter was not pursued further.
[¶ 8] At the time of the father's trial, the mother gave the daughter a necklace as a birthday gift which the daughter returned to her after the trial. A short time later, the grandmother and the daughter obtained protective orders from the District Court of Lincoln County, Nebraska to preclude all contact by the parents. Instead of returning home, the daughter remained with her grandparents, completed high school, and obtained a job as a horse trainer.
[¶ 9] From the record, it appears the parents never reported the daughter's horse was stolen nor made any larceny or trespass complaints. Further, they filed no legal action in either Nebraska or Wyoming to regain custody of their daughter from the grandparents, nor did they appear in the Nebraska district court to contest the protective orders.
[¶ 10] In January 2000, the parents filed a civil complaint, subsequently amended, alleging various causes of action against the grandparents, the neighbors, Deputy Crumpton, the brand inspector, Ken Peterson, and the Laramie County sheriff's department. The combined damages were alleged to be "in excess of $500,000.00 plus punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter the defendants and others."3 The parents appeal the district court's order by which all the causes of action were dismissed.
McLean v. Hyland Enterprises, Inc., 2001 WY 111, ¶ 14, 34 P.3d 1262, ¶ 14 (Wyo.2001). If we can uphold summary judgment on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Sines
...such as clothing and books. I Donald T. Kramer, Legal Rights of Children, § 8:12; 67 A CJS Parent and Child, § 119; Hoblyn v. Johnson, 55 P.3d 1219 (Wyo. 2002) ; see also Potter v. Davidson, 143 Or. 101 (1933) (parent is entitled to the earnings of his minor children)."The trial court held ......
-
Bierman v. Weier
...defamation action, unless proceeding on a theory of defamation per se, proves damages or a harm to reputation.”); Hoblyn v. Johnson, 55 P.3d 1219, 1233 (Wyo.2002) (“Defamation per se means a statement which is defamatory on its face and, therefore, actionable without proof of special damage......
-
Merrill v. Jansma
...summary judgment orders, we have the same duty, review the same materials, and follow the same standards as the district court. Hoblyn v. Johnson, 2002 WY 152, ¶ 11, 55 P.3d 1219, ¶ 11 (Wyo.2002). The propriety of granting a motion for summary judgment depends upon the correctness of a cour......
-
Wilcox v. Sec. State Bank
...¶ 56, 242 P.3d 973, 992 (Wyo. 2010) (citing Borns ex rel. Gannon v. Voss , 2003 WY 74, ¶¶ 34–35, 70 P.3d 262, 275 (Wyo. 2003) ; Hoblyn v. Johnson , 2002 WY 152, ¶ 22, 55 P.3d 1219, 1227 (Wyo. 2002) ; Hulse v. First Amer. Title Co. , 2001 WY 95, ¶ 48, 33 P.3d 122, 137 (Wyo. 2001) ; Richey v.......
-
Related State Torts
...Torts §3:167 • Gastrointestinal problems. See, e.g., Dean v. Ford Motor Credit Co ., 885 F.2d 300 (5th Cir. 1989); Hoblyn v. Johnson , 55 P.3d 1219, 1232 (Wyo. 2002); Jackson v. Creditwatch, Inc ., 84 S.W.3d 397, 408 (Tex. 2002); Miller v. Willbanks , 8 S.W.3d 607, 615 (Tenn. 1999). But see......