Over the past several months, significant challenges have arisen regarding access to judicial records and court data from the Albany County District Court, specifically related to cases overseen by Judge Westby. These issues have affected the ability to obtain case information, review judicial actions, and ensure transparency and accessibility for individuals who cannot physically visit the courthouse.
Requests were made to identify and obtain specific categories of case information, including:
This information is only accessible through the courthouse terminal, which cannot be accessed remotely. This creates a substantial barrier for individuals who are out of state, have disabilities, or otherwise cannot physically enter the courthouse.
Albany County’s Deputy County & Prosecuting Attorney, Jennifer M. Curran, issued a final response stating that the entirety of the requests remain denied pursuant to § 16-4-202(d)(ii) of the Wyoming Public Records Act, which states that a governmental entity is not required to:
"compile data, extract data, or create a new document to comply with an electronic record request."
This denial applies to all requests originating from or related to June 3, 2026.
I want to clarify that the statute cited, § 16‑4‑202(d)(ii), does not resolve the issue I raised. My request is for existing public records—summary judgments, fee orders, Rule 60 filings, and related docket entries—that the court already possesses. Providing access to existing records is not “compiling data,” “extracting data,” or “creating a new document,” and the statute does not authorize a denial of access to records the court already maintains.
The barrier I described remains unaddressed: these records are only accessible through a single physical terminal inside the courthouse. For individuals who are out of state, disabled, homebound, medically limited, or otherwise unable to enter the building, this setup results in a complete denial of access. The practical effect is that certain members of the public cannot obtain records at all, which raises the ADA and equal‑access concerns outlined in my prior messages.
My request is simply for a method of accessing the existing records the court already has—whether through vendor export, supervised remote access, or any other mechanism that does not require creating new documents. If there is an alternative means to obtain these records without physical presence in the courthouse, any assistance would be appreciated.
The inability to access court records remotely raises serious ADA-related concerns. Individuals who cannot physically visit the courthouse—whether due to disability, distance, or other limitations—are effectively barred from accessing public judicial information.
These concerns were raised in communications to the Wyoming AOC and Albany County officials, but responses have not resolved the underlying accessibility issues.
Two separate matters were reviewed by state authorities:
Despite extensive documentation — including digital entry without notice, contradictory statements, timeline inconsistencies, and evidence submitted directly to the Commission — the investigation concluded with “no wrongdoing found.”
This outcome is very concerning not because of disagreement, but because it suggests that even well‑supported complaints may not result in meaningful review or accountability within Wyoming’s current regulatory structure.
The Real Estate Commission’s mandate is limited, and its review process is narrow. In practice, this means:
As a result, conduct that would raise serious concerns for renters, parents, or housing advocates may fall outside what the Commission considers actionable.
When a regulatory body concludes “no wrongdoing” despite documented privacy violations, non-renewal based on calling 911 which is a protected activity, and contradictory statements and concerning online behavior, it highlights a structural issue: Wyoming’s oversight mechanisms may not be equipped to protect renters or evaluate misconduct beyond narrow statutory definitions.
This website documents these gaps so that renters, parents, and community members can make informed decisions — even when official channels fail to acknowledge the full scope of the concerns raised.
Important Note: No transcripts were produced for either review. Instead, the reviews relied on the judge’s own summary judgment documents.
A new request has been initiated as of August 23rd, 2026 to obtain audio recordings from the court, with the goal of generating transcripts using AI tools. This approach may help overcome the lack of accessible written transcripts and provide a clearer record of proceedings.
The broader effort to document and address these issues continues, including public-facing transparency initiatives such as:
The situation reflects a persistent and systemic barrier to accessing judicial information in Albany County. Despite multiple inquiries, escalations, and formal requests, the core issues remain unresolved. Continued documentation and accountability efforts are essential to ensure transparency, accessibility, and compliance with public records and ADA obligations.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.