Hoback Ranches, Inc. v. Urroz

622 P.2d 948, 1981 Wyo. LEXIS 324
Wyoming Supreme Court·Decided January 28, 1981·No. 5441·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

*949 ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

There having been noneompliance with Rule 54(b), W.R.C.P., in that the crossclaims of the appellant against the State of Wyoming have not been determined, therefore the liabilities of fewer than all of the parties were determined upon issuance of an order granting partial summary judgment, and there being no express determination that there is no just reason for delay. Hayes v. Nielson, Wyo., 568 P.2d 905 (1977); Olmstead v. Cattle, Inc., Wyo., 541 P.2d 49 (1975); Crossan v. Irrigation Development Corp., Wyo., 598 P.2d 812 (1979), pursuant to Rules 1.04 and 1.05 and 16, W.R.A.P., upon motion to dismiss filed by appellee, Urroz, it is

ORDERED that the entitled appeal be and is dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hoback Ranches, Inc. v. Urroz, 622 P.2d 948, 1981 Wyo. LEXIS 324 (Wyo. 1981).

622 P.2d 948 (Hoback Ranches, Inc. v. Urroz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Amos v. Lincoln County School District No. 2
2015 WY 115 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2015)
Eklund v. Farmers Insurance Exchange
2004 WY 24 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2004)
Stone v. Stone
842 P.2d 545 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1992)
Barker Bros., Inc. v. Barker-Taylor
823 P.2d 1204 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1992)
Alexander v. United States
803 P.2d 61 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1990)
In Re Big Horn River System
803 P.2d 61 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1990)