Back to Wyoming
Wyoming2011Enacted

SF0015

Wyoming Court Jurisdiction Changes

Last scannedOct 19, 2026, 2:19 AM

In one sentence

This law increases the maximum dollar amounts that small claims and circuit courts can handle in civil cases.

What it does

  • Raises the small claims court limit from $5,000 to $6,000.
  • Raises the circuit court exclusive jurisdiction limit from $7,000 to $50,000.
  • Allows district court judges to assign cases to circuit court judges if the amount in controversy is $50,000 or more.
  • Applies the new limits to actions for personal property, liens, and security interests.
  • Sets the effective date of the changes as July 1, 2011.

Who it affects

  • Small claims courts and circuit courts in Wyoming.
  • Plaintiffs and defendants in civil cases involving money or property.
  • The Department of Revenue when consolidating tax collection claims.

Limits and unknowns

  • The bill text does not specify how these changes affect criminal cases.
  • The source does not explain the specific dollar limitations for the Department of Revenue's consolidated tax claims.

Plain language

Terms to know

Jurisdiction
The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case.
Circuit Court
A state court that handles civil cases, including those with higher dollar amounts than small claims.
Small Claims Court
A court for resolving disputes involving smaller amounts of money.

Official record

Sources

Source checked
Read the official summary

Bill No.: <billno> Drafter: <drafterinit> Bill No.: SF0015 Drafter: JHR LSO No.: 11LSO-0206 Effective Date: 7/1/2011 Enrolled Act No.: SEA0087 Chapter No.: 196 Prime Sponsor: Joint Judiciary Interim Committee Catch Title: Court jurisdiction. Subject: Jurisdiction of circuit and small claims court. Summary/Major Elements: The act increases the jurisdiction amount in small claims court from $5,000 to $6,000. The act increases the exclusive jurisdiction amount in circuit courts from $7,000 to $50,000.

Public statements

Why lawmakers voted

Last checked Aug 7, 9:38 PM

Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The speaker supports the bill because it represents a compromise reached with the House and Supreme Court to maintain circuit court jurisdiction at $50,000 while raising small claims court limits from $5,000 to $6,000 to keep up with inflation.

Public statementFloor statement at 9:24 Watch the statement
Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker believes the House amendments to court jurisdiction limits are reasonable and supports agreeing with them.

Public statementFloor statement at 16:23 Watch the statement
Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker argues that changing the bill would disrupt a delicate compromise involving court clerks and urges maintaining the Senate position.

Public statementFloor statement at 17:03 Watch the statement
Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill and amendment as a compromise, arguing it respects the judicial branch's assessment of their problems while addressing concerns about court workload.

Public statementFloor statement at 50:09 Watch the statement
Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the bill but urges caution because she believes raising limits too high shifts financial burdens between state and county paid clerks, creating a potential crisis.

Public statementFloor statement at 52:47 Watch the statement
Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the amendment because he believes the balance between courts should not be determined solely by clerks' views on revenue and workload, but rather through further dialogue.

Public statementFloor statement at 55:17 Watch the statement
Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker states he prefers the $10,000 limit for civil cases because it seems like a more appropriate level based on testimony comparing claims to the value of a used car.

Public statementFloor statement at 57:02 Watch the statement
Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker explains that the current small claims process relies on scanty information which makes justice a matter of chance for higher amounts, so he urges support for lowering the limit to $6,000.

Public statementFloor statement at 59:28 Watch the statement
Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports the amendment as an appropriate compromise because he believes the goal is simply to get people in front of a judge rather than fixing a broken system.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:00:29 Watch the statement

If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.

Wyoming roll calls

Recorded votes

7 roll calls

H Adopted JCC01 52-7-1-0-02011-03-02 · House52 yes 7 no
S Adopted SF0015 28-2-0-0-02011-03-01 · Senate28 yes 2 no
S Did Not Concur 2-28-0-0-02011-02-14 · Senate2 yes 28 no
H Passed 3rd Reading 39-20-1-0-02011-02-10 · House39 yes 20 no
H01 Recommended Do Pass 8-0-1-0-02011-02-07 · House8 yes 0 no
S Passed 3rd Reading 30-0-0-0-02011-01-19 · Senate30 yes 0 no
S01 Recommended Amend and Do Pass 5-0-0-0-02011-01-14 · Senate5 yes 0 no

Official activity

Bill history

  1. Assigned Chapter NumberLSO
  2. Governor Signed SEA0087Governor
  3. H Speaker Signed SEA No. 0087House
  4. S President Signed SEA No. 0087Senate
  5. Assigned Number SEA0087LSO
  6. H Adopted SF0015JC01House
  7. S Adopted SF0015JC01Senate
  8. H Appointed JCC01 MembersHouse
  9. S Appointed JCC01 MembersSenate
  10. S Did Not ConcurSenate
  11. S Received for ConcurrenceSenate
  12. H Passed 3rd ReadingHouse
  13. Amendment AdoptedHouse
  14. H Passed 2nd ReadingHouse
  15. H Amendments AdoptedHouse
  16. Amendment AdoptedHouse
  17. H Passed CoWHouse
  18. H Placed on General FileHouse
  19. H01 Recommended Do PassHouse
  20. H Introduced and Referred to H01House

Changes

Amendments

4 stored

SF0015H2001

Adopted 2nd reading by GINGERY

SF0015H2002

Withdrawn 2nd reading by BROWN

SF0015H3001

Adopted 3rd reading by GINGERY

SF0015SS001

Adopted Standing Committee by PERKINS