Wyoming Supreme Court ruling strengthens property rights

Government officials who damage private property must pay for what they ruin ruled the Wyoming Supreme Court unanimously last week in Thomas Hamann v. Heart Mountain Irrigation District.

Common sense should have dictated the outcome years ago. But the decision ends a years- long battle between the Hamann family of Cody and Heart Mountain Irrigation District (HMID), whose former manager destroyed about $10,000 of fencing and other property and personally and permanently injured Mr. Hamann with an excavator while accessing his family’s land without permission.

This is not just an example of one family receiving the partial justice it deserved (the case only dealt with the property damage, not the personal injury). It is a case of one man standing up for his rights so that every property owner in Wyoming will be treated with fairness and respect by irrigation districts and other state and local government organizations in the months and years ahead.

HMID argued successfully in district court that it wasn’t liable for the damage to the Hamann’s property because board members hadn’t specifically authorized the manager’s actions during a public meeting (background on the story here). During testimony, however, board members admitted that they frequently did not monitor the manager’s actions and left many decisions about how to carry out the function of the district to his discretion.

Besides, under that logic, HMID would literally have to vote during public meetings on when and where a manager and other employees drink coffee, use the restroom, and other daily activities. Egregiously, HMID attempted to use open meetings laws as a cudgel to protect it from being held responsible for its role in the Hamann’s property damage when those laws are specifically designed to make it easier for citizens to make the inner workings of their government more transparent and accountable. It had argued that it could only make decisions during open meetings and therefore couldn’t be held responsible for the manager’s actions, which were not discussed in one.

The state Supreme Court found that the manager was acting within the normal scope of his duties and that HMID should be held liable for his actions, even if board members hadn’t expressly ordered his behavior. A legal doctrine known as vicarious liability is used routinely to sue employers whose employees damage or ruin property or assault individuals, among other issues, when employees are acting within the normal range of their duties as in this case.

Federal courts have also held the federal government responsible for the damage of their employees. The case could have gone farther by stating that all state and local government employees acting within the scope of their normal duties would be held to this standard, but the court chose to stick to the specifics of this particular case, which hinged on whether Mr. Hamann was due compensation under the state’s inverse condemnation statute.

Inverse condemnation is a legal action by a property owner against the government for taking or damaging property. It is the opposite of eminent domain, the legal mechanism through which the government takes private property and compensates the owner ahead of the seizure. As the court found, “HMID’s narrow stance on liability is notably inconsistent with the very purpose of the inverse condemnation statute: to provide a means for landowners to seek compensation when the government forgoes formal action.”

While specific to HMID, the decision does put state and local government organizations on notice that they are not above the law and can be sued successfully for property damage.

As Austin Waisanen, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, the pro bono legal group representing Mr. Hamann, said, “This is an important victory for Wyoming property owners.” He added, “The government cannot avoid its obligation to pay compensation to property owners for property damage caused by its employees by merely claiming that an employee’s actions were unauthorized. ‘You break it, you fix it’ applies to the government, just like everyone else.” 

Mr. Hamann said he is relieved by the decision despite the fact that he is still dealing with the physical damage of the incident. “I’ve resigned myself to the fact that my payoff is that they won’t do this to anyone else again,” he said.

This ruling should be posted in every state and local government office as a reminder that everyone is beholden to the rule of law, including its enforcers.