The Wyoming Supreme Court issued an opinion in February 2026 addressing a multi-party construction dispute involving alleged defects in a manufacturing facility built for Gunwerks LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company.
The case, designated as 2026 WY 16 and numbered S-25-0090, originated from the District Court of Park County under Judge Bill Simpson. The dispute centers on a manufacturing facility development project that involved multiple parties and complex contractual relationships.
According to the court documents, Gunwerks entered into an agreement with Forward Cody Wyoming Inc., a Wyoming non-profit corporation, and the City of Cody. Under this arrangement, the City and Forward Cody would obtain grants and loans to develop a new manufacturing facility specifically for Gunwerks' operations.
To execute the project, Forward Cody retained the professional services of Plan One Architects, a Wyoming for-profit corporation, and Sletten Construction of Wyoming Inc., another Wyoming for-profit corporation. These companies were tasked with designing, building, and completing the manufacturing facility project.
The legal dispute arose when Gunwerks alleged that the completed facility contained numerous defects. Based on these claimed deficiencies, Gunwerks filed suit against Forward Cody for breach of contract, arguing that the non-profit organization failed to deliver a facility that met the agreed-upon specifications and quality standards.
Gunwerks also brought legal action against both Plan One Architects and Sletten Construction, though the specific nature of the claims against these design and construction professionals was not fully detailed in the available court documents. The involvement of these parties suggests potential claims related to professional negligence, breach of contract, or construction defects.
The case involved extensive legal representation across multiple firms. Timothy M. Stubson and Holly Tysse from Crowley Fleck PLLP in Casper represented Gunwerks as the appellant in the Supreme Court proceedings. Both attorneys presented oral arguments on behalf of their client.
Forward Cody Wyoming Inc. was represented by Jay A. Gilbertz and Kevin K. Kessner from Yonkee & Toner LLP in Sheridan, with Kessner handling the oral arguments for the appellee. Sletten Construction retained Patrick T. Holscher from Schwartz, Bon, Walker & Studer LLC in Casper, who also presented oral arguments. Plan One Architects was represented by James C. Worthen from Hall & Evans LLC in Casper, with Worthen arguing on behalf of his client.
The case involved complex cross-claims and counter-claims among the parties. Forward Cody appeared to have filed both counter-claims against Gunwerks and cross-claims against other defendants, indicating the intricate nature of the contractual relationships and potential liability issues among all parties involved in the construction project.
The Wyoming Supreme Court panel hearing the case included Chief Justice Boomgaarden, along with Justices Gray, Fenn, Hill, and District Judge McKay sitting by designation. Justice Hill authored the court's opinion in the matter.
The case represents a complex construction law dispute involving multiple layers of contractual relationships, from the initial development agreement between Gunwerks, Forward Cody, and the City of Cody, to the subsequent professional services contracts with architects and contractors.
While the full details of the court's ruling and reasoning are not available in the provided documents, the case illustrates the potential legal complexities that can arise in construction projects involving multiple parties, particularly when public-private partnerships and grant funding are involved.
The involvement of a non-profit corporation in facilitating the development adds an additional layer of complexity to the typical construction dispute scenario. Such arrangements are sometimes used to access grant funding or other financial incentives that might not be directly available to for-profit entities.
The Supreme Court's opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Pacific Reporter Third series, as noted in the court's standard disclaimer. This case may provide guidance for future construction disputes involving similar multi-party development arrangements in Wyoming.
The dispute highlights the importance of clear contractual terms and quality standards in construction projects, particularly those involving multiple parties with different roles and responsibilities in the development process.