BJ Hough, LLC v. City of Cheyenne, 287 P.3d 761

Swan Ranch, LLC petitioned for annexation of ~150 acres to the City of Cheyenne in 2009; the land was undeveloped and served by no City sewer or water.
City Ordinance No. 3840 annexed Swan Ranch after public hearings and planning director findings.
Neighbors (Appellants) filed an Appeal under § 15-1-409 and a declaratory judgment action challenging the annexation's validity.
The district court granted partial summary judgment on two claims and later held a three-day bench trial on the remaining claim, ruling in the City's favor on the annexation's statutory compliance.
Appellants challenged whether the City complied with § 15-1-402(a) criteria (health/safety, urban development, logical/feasible extension of services) and contiguity; appellants lacked standing as non-landowners.
Wyoming courts held that declaratory judgments are proper to challenge the validity of annexation ordinances and that appellants must show error in validity, not merits; contiguity interpretation was central to the decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court properly found the annexation valid	Appellants contend the ordinance failed statutory criteria and contiguity	City satisfied § 15-1-402(a) requirements and contiguity standards	Yes; annexation upheld as valid

Piroschak v. Whelan, 106 P.3d 887 (Wyoming 2005) (clearly delineates bench-trial review standards)
Coz v. City of Cheyenne, 79 P.3d 500 (Wyoming 2003) (standing and review under § 15-1-409; declaratory judgment context)
Bd. of County Comm'rs v. City of Cheyenne, 85 P.3d 999 (Wyoming 2004) (contiguity interpretation and statutory context for annexation review)
In re West Laramie, 457 P.2d 498 (Wyoming 1969) (contiguity/adjacency principle in annexation)