Longacre v. State, 3703

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
Writing for the CourtMcINTYRE
Citation448 P.2d 832
Parties70 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2646, 1 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 635, 1 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9939 Bob F. LONGACRE and Hattie Longacre, Appellants (Defendants below), v. The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Plaintiff below).
Docket NumberNo. 3703,3703
Decision Date31 December 1968

Page 832

448 P.2d 832
70 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2646, 1 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 635,
1 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9939
Bob F. LONGACRE and Hattie Longacre, Appellants (Defendants below),
v.
The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Plaintiff below).
No. 3703.
Supreme Court of Wyoming.
Dec. 31, 1968.

Dean W. Borthwick, Cheyenne, for appellants.

Sterling A. Case, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Lynn R. Garrett, Deputy Atty. Gen., Cheyenne, Robert A. Gish, County and Prosecuting Atty., Basin, for appellee.

Before HARNSBERGER, C. J., and GRAY, McINTYRE, and PARKER, JJ.

Mr. Justice McINTYRE delivered the opinion of the court.

This case brings into question the validity of the provision contained in ch. 162, § 1, S.L. of Wyoming 1963 (§ 12-20, W.S.1957, 1967 Cum.Supp.), which states, 'No female shall be employed as a bartender in a room holding a retail liquor license.'

In a civil action initiated by the county attorney of Big Horn County the district court found appellants, Bob F. Longacre and Hattie Longacre, in violation of the laws of Wyoming for employing a woman bartender. A suspension of the retail liquor license of the Longacres was ordered for one week. The licensees have appealed claiming the prohibition against the employment of a woman bartender is unconstitutional and void; and that such prohibition is also void because it has been superseded by subsequent legislation.

Appellants suggest the prohibition against the employment of women bartenders has been impliedly repealed by the subsequent

Page 833

enactment, in 1965, of the Fair Employment Practices Act, §§ 27-257 to 27-264, W.S.1957, C.1967. If that be so, we will not need to decide whether the prohibition was constitutional prior to its implied repeal.

Section 27-261, W.S.1957, C.1967, states:

'It shall be a discriminatory or unfair employment practice: (1) For an employer to refuse to hire, to discharge, to promote or demote, or to discriminate in matters of compensation against, any person otherwise qualified, because of sex, race, creed, color, national origin or ancestry.

'(2) For a person, an employment agency, a labor organization, or the employees or members thereof, to discriminate in matters of employment or membership against any person, otherwise qualified, because of sex, race, creed, color, national origin or ancestry.'

To us, the Fair Employment Practices Act is plain and unambiguous. It contains no exceptions. It clearly makes it unlawful for an employer to:

1. Refuse to hire any person otherwise qualified because of sex;

2. Discharge any person otherwise qualified because of sex;

3. Promote or demote any person otherwise qualified because of sex; or

4. Discriminate in matters of compensation against any person otherwise qualified because of sex.

Where the legislature enacts two laws and such laws contain conflicting provisions and are so repugnant to each other that they cannot stand together, the later enactment will prevail over the earlier one. State v. Cantrell, 64 Wyo. 132, 186 P.2d 539, 542; State v. Mayer, 81 Idaho 111, 338 P.2d 270, 273; State ex rel. Hughes v. State Board of Land Commissioners, 137 Mont. 510, 353 P.2d 331, 336-337; In re Martinez' Will,47 N.M. 6, 132 P.2d 422, 424.

The directive in § 27-261 that an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Nehring v. Russell, No. 4831
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • July 7, 1978
    ...P.2d 1235, reh. den.; Thomas v. State, Wyo.1977, 562 P.2d 1287; Hutchins v. State, Wyo.1971, 483 P.2d 519; Longacre v. State, Wyo.1968, 448 P.2d 832; Doyle v. Schroeder, 1956, 76 Wyo. 178, 301 P.2d 379, and while such implicit repeals have at times been found, Thomas v. State,supra; Longacr......
  • State v. Sodergren, 83-110
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • June 26, 1984
    ...State v. Cantrell, supra, 186 P.2d at 543; but this court has not hesitated to apply this in a proper case, Longacre v. State, Wyo., 448 P.2d 832, 834; Blount v. City of Laramie, Wyo., 510 P.2d 294, 296; Tucker v. State ex rel. Snow, 35 Wyo. 430, 251 P. 460, 465. If the statutes cannot stan......
  • Johnson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., No. 4752
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • September 15, 1977
    ...without authority to modify § 1-7.7 by writing into it an exception which the legislature did not express. Cf. Longacre v. State, Wyo., 448 P.2d 832, 834 In Ivey v. Wiggins, 276 Ala. 106, 159 So.2d 618 (1964), the Supreme Court of Alabama was faced with the question of whether a cause of ac......
  • Sorenson v. State, 5118
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • December 27, 1979
    ...it repeals by implication earlier laws dealing with only a small part of the same subject. (Citations.)" Longacre v. State, Wyo., 448 P.2d 832, 834 And see Hutchins v. State, Wyo., 483 P.2d 519 (1971). If the parole is mandated by Page 1038 the court at a specific time after incarceration, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Nehring v. Russell, No. 4831
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • July 7, 1978
    ...P.2d 1235, reh. den.; Thomas v. State, Wyo.1977, 562 P.2d 1287; Hutchins v. State, Wyo.1971, 483 P.2d 519; Longacre v. State, Wyo.1968, 448 P.2d 832; Doyle v. Schroeder, 1956, 76 Wyo. 178, 301 P.2d 379, and while such implicit repeals have at times been found, Thomas v. State,supra; Longacr......
  • State v. Sodergren, No. 83-110
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • June 26, 1984
    ...State v. Cantrell, supra, 186 P.2d at 543; but this court has not hesitated to apply this in a proper case, Longacre v. State, Wyo., 448 P.2d 832, 834; Blount v. City of Laramie, Wyo., 510 P.2d 294, 296; Tucker v. State ex rel. Snow, 35 Wyo. 430, 251 P. 460, 465. If the statutes cannot stan......
  • Johnson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., No. 4752
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • September 15, 1977
    ...without authority to modify § 1-7.7 by writing into it an exception which the legislature did not express. Cf. Longacre v. State, Wyo., 448 P.2d 832, 834 In Ivey v. Wiggins, 276 Ala. 106, 159 So.2d 618 (1964), the Supreme Court of Alabama was faced with the question of whether a cause of ac......
  • Sorenson v. State, No. 5118
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • December 27, 1979
    ...it repeals by implication earlier laws dealing with only a small part of the same subject. (Citations.)" Longacre v. State, Wyo., 448 P.2d 832, 834 And see Hutchins v. State, Wyo., 483 P.2d 519 (1971). If the parole is mandated by Page 1038 the court at a specific time after incarceration, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT