Maycock v. State
2011 WY 104
Wyo.2011Background
- Maycock began as a part-time employee in 1984, became full-time supervisor, then general cemetery supervisor, and retired in 2008 before joining the Board.
- Since 1985 the District financed health insurance for employees and families, initially with Time and later Humana; Humana policy limited coverage to employees, spouses, and dependent children.
- On December 4, 1992, Maycock enrolled in the District’s plan, listing Bill Maycock as her spouse, resulting in the District paying his premiums.
- The Maycocks were divorced in 1971, remained living together as a family, remarried on September 1, 1999, but were not legally married in 1992.
- In August 2009, a tip prompted an investigation, revealing the bankruptcy of the marriage status; charges followed in September 2009.
- A jury convicted Maycock of obtaining property by false pretenses; the Wyoming Supreme Court reverses due to insufficient evidence of reliance by the District.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State proved reliance by the District on the misrepresentation. | Maycock | Maycock | Insufficient evidence of reliance; reversal affirmed |
| Whether the best evidence rule was violated by admission of policy contents without the policy itself. | State | Maycock | Not reached due to lack of reliance evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Lopez v. State, 86 P.3d 851 (Wy. 2004) (elements of obtaining property by false pretenses; reliance required)
- Trevino v. State, 142 P.3d 214 (Wy. 2006) (sufficiency of evidence standard)
- Miller v. State, 732 P.2d 1054 (Wy. 1987) (elements of false pretenses)
- Driver v. State, 589 P.2d 391 (Wy. 1979) (purpose and proof in false pretenses)