Williams v. Matheny, 398 P.3d 521

Background

On Sept. 22, 2015 Williams requested lists of weapons/offensive/defensive implements carried by officers at the scene of the Niki Jo Burtsfield killing and items normally carried in officers’ vehicles.
Campbell County Sheriff’s Office provided annual patrol equipment inventories, General Order 302, two general orders (including G.O. 201), an incident report, and some DCI information; officer firearms details came from bi-annual qualification sheets.
Williams filed a “Petition for Reasonable Response” under Wyo. Stat. § 16-4-202(b)&(c), seeking copies, assistance identifying responsive documents, or full physical access to non-exempt records.
Sheriff moved for judgment on the pleadings/summary judgment; district court allowed conversion to summary judgment and granted the Sheriff’s motion.
On appeal Williams argued (in part) he should be allowed to physically inspect all records and challenged custodial practices; the Court of Appeals treated most arguments as new and focused on whether the dispute was moot.
The court concluded Williams had received the document he sought (G.O. 201) and other responsive records; his remaining insistence on physical inspection was speculative and the controversy was moot, so summary judgment was affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether district court properly dismissed as moot after Sheriff moved for summary judgment	Williams: He still needed physical inspection of all files; he alleged Sheriff may be withholding documents and that receiving copies was insufficient.	Sheriff: Provided inventories, general orders, incident report, and DCI info; no denial of access and no outstanding justiciable controversy.	Court: Affirmed dismissal as moot—Williams received G.O. 201 and other responsive materials; remaining assertions speculative.
Whether custodian must allow physical, unrestricted inspection of all non-exempt records	Williams: Custodian cannot keep records physically isolated; must allow physical inspection rather than merely provide copies.	Sheriff: Act permits inspection subject to custodian’s protection and procedures; no blanket physical-inspection entitlement beyond Act.	Held: Not necessary to decide fully; Act does not contemplate the relief Williams sought and no denial occurred; physical-inspection demand insufficient here.
Whether custodian must create or compile new records or lists in response to requests	Williams: Custodian should produce lists/identify items even if not in single document.	Sheriff: Act does not require creating new records or compiling data; only existing physical records are subject to disclosure.	Held: Act does not obligate creation/compilation of records; only existing physical records are public records.
Whether requester may challenge custodian’s factual statement that no more responsive documents exist absent proof	Williams: Public should not have to accept custodian’s claim without ability to verify physically.	Sheriff: Burden on requester to show disputed material facts; speculative assertions insufficient to defeat summary judgment.	Held: Williams’ allegations were conjectural and inadequate to create a genuine factual dispute; summary judgment proper.

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Arnold v. Ommen, 201 P.3d 1127 (Wyo. 2009) (standard of review for summary judgment in declaratory actions)
Voss v. Goodman, 203 P.3d 415 (Wyo. 2009) (summary judgment standard and appellate review)
Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Laramie Cty. Sch. Dist. No. One, 384 P.3d 679 (Wyo. 2016) (summary judgment and public-records context)
Cont’l W. Ins. Co. v. Black, 361 P.3d 841 (Wyo. 2015) (procedural standards for summary disposition)
City of Casper v. Holloway, 354 P.3d 65 (Wyo. 2015) (appellate review of district court legal rulings)
Christensen v. Carbon County, 100 P.3d 411 (Wyo. 2004) (burden-shifting and opposing evidence required to defeat summary judgment)