The Wyoming Supreme Court issued a decision Thursday affirming a lower court's summary judgment ruling in a construction industry dispute involving a high-end firearms manufacturing facility. In *Sletten Construction of Wyoming, Inc. v. Big Horn Glass, Inc.*, the state's highest court upheld the District Court of Park County's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of Big Horn Glass on third-party claims brought by Sletten Construction.
The case stems from a construction project to build a new manufacturing facility in Cody, Wyoming, for Gunwerks, LLC, a company that manufactures and sells high-end firearms and related equipment. Gunwerks sought to expand its operations through the construction of this new facility, which was partially financed with public funds.
As part of the financing structure, Gunwerks entered into an agreement with Forward Cody Wyoming, Inc., though the complete details of this arrangement were not fully disclosed in the available court documents. The construction project involved multiple parties, with Sletten Construction serving as what appears to be a primary contractor and Big Horn Glass functioning as a subcontractor or specialty contractor focused on glass installation work.
The legal dispute arose when the original plaintiff, Gunwerks, apparently filed claims against Sletten Construction related to the construction project. In response, Sletten Construction filed third-party claims against Big Horn Glass, arguing that the glass contractor could potentially bear some responsibility for the damages claimed by Gunwerks.
Sletten Construction's central argument on appeal was that material questions of fact existed regarding whether Big Horn Glass could be held at fault for some portion of the damages alleged by Gunwerks in the underlying litigation. This type of third-party claim is common in construction disputes, where primary contractors often seek to distribute liability among various subcontractors and specialty contractors involved in a project.
The District Court of Park County, presided over by the Honorable Bill Simpson, granted summary judgment in favor of Big Horn Glass on Sletten's third-party complaint. Summary judgment is appropriate when there are no genuine disputes of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The district court's ruling effectively eliminated Big Horn Glass from the litigation, finding that Sletten could not establish a viable claim for contribution or indemnification.
On appeal to the Wyoming Supreme Court, Sletten Construction was represented by Patrick T. Holscher of Schwartz, Bon, Walker & Studer, LLC, based in Casper, Wyoming. Big Horn Glass was represented by Andrew J. Carafelli and Dino G. Moncecchi of Harris, Karstaedt, Jamison & Powers, P.C., an Englewood, Colorado-based firm.
The Wyoming Supreme Court panel consisted of Chief Justice Boomgaarden and Justices Gray, Fenn, Hill, and District Judge McKay sitting by designation. Justice Fenn authored the court's opinion, which was designated as 2026 WY 12 and decided during the October Term of 2025.
In its analysis, the Wyoming Supreme Court focused on whether the district court properly determined that no material questions of fact existed regarding Big Horn Glass's potential liability. The court examined the legal standards for third-party claims in construction disputes and whether Sletten Construction had presented sufficient evidence to create a genuine factual dispute about Big Horn Glass's role in any damages suffered by Gunwerks.
The court's decision to affirm the summary judgment ruling indicates that the justices agreed with the district court's assessment that Sletten Construction failed to establish a sufficient factual basis for its third-party claims against Big Horn Glass. This could suggest that either the evidence did not support a theory of liability against the glass contractor, or that legal doctrines such as the economic loss rule or contractual limitations prevented such claims.
The case highlights the complex nature of construction litigation, where multiple parties often seek to allocate responsibility for project delays, defects, or other damages among various contractors and subcontractors. Third-party practice allows defendants to bring additional parties into litigation who may share responsibility for the plaintiff's claimed damages.
The involvement of public financing in the Gunwerks facility construction adds another layer of complexity to the dispute, as publicly funded construction projects often involve additional regulatory requirements and oversight that can affect liability determinations.
This decision may have implications for future construction disputes in Wyoming, particularly regarding the standards for establishing third-party liability claims against subcontractors and specialty contractors. The ruling reinforces the importance of establishing clear factual bases for contribution and indemnification claims in construction litigation.
The opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Pacific Reporter Third series, and the court has requested notification of any typographical or formal errors before final publication. The case was decided on January 23, 2026, and assigned docket number S-25-0115 in the Wyoming Supreme Court's case management system.