Legal Opinion
Osborn v. Painter
Wyoming Supreme Court
Decided January 8, 1996No. 95-58PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS, Justice.
The question posed by this case is whether a civil action is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted when the action, confessedly, is brought to relitigate issues resolved by a final county court judgment entered in 1989. Richard B. Osborn (Osborn), who represents himself in all his litigation, asserts he is not foreclosed from a collateral attack on the county court judgment because Donald L. Painter (Painter), the attorney for Clarice Lyle Manning (Manning), made an incorrect and fraudulent statement in pleading the county court…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Vanasse v. RamsayWyoming Supreme Court · 1993
- Reynolds v. Lloyd Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Delgue v. CurutchetWyoming Supreme Court · 1984
- Rialto Theatre, Inc. v. Commonwealth Theatres, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1986
- Osborn v. Emporium VideosWyoming Supreme Court · 1993
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hodgins v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2000
- Amen, Inc. v. BarnardWyoming Supreme Court · 1997
- Osborn v. KiltsWyoming Supreme Court · 2006
- McCulloh v. DrakeWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
- In the Matter of the Phyllis V. Mcdill Revocable Trust: Thomas P. Mcdill, Jr., In His Individual Capacity as Beneficiary and Successor Trustee of the Phyliss Mcdill Revocable Trust. v. Michael G. Mcdill, In His Individual Capacity as Beneficiary of the Phyliss Mcdill Revocable TrustWyoming Supreme Court · 2022
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.