The Wyoming Supreme Court has upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by former University of Wyoming employee Amyntas Hinckley. The court ruled on November 3, 2026, that Hinckley's claims of discrimination, wrongful termination, and other grievances were barred by the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act and that she failed to follow proper legal procedures. This ruling impacts Hinckley and others who may face similar challenges in seeking redress for employment-related grievances against state entities.

Hinckley, who represented herself in court, alleged that she faced discrimination based on her sex while employed as a marketing and communications specialist at the University. She claimed she was paid less than a male colleague for similar work and that her work environment was hostile. After raising concerns about this treatment, she alleged that the University retaliated against her, ultimately leading to her termination. Following her dismissal, she accused the University of providing false information to the Wyoming Department of Workforce Services, which delayed her unemployment benefits.

The dispute began when Hinckley filed her initial complaint in December 2024, citing several causes of action, including retaliation, sex discrimination, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The University responded with a motion to dismiss, arguing that it was immune from such claims under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act. The district court agreed and dismissed Hinckley’s complaint, prompting her to appeal to the Wyoming Supreme Court.

In its ruling, the court affirmed the lower court's decision, stating that the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act protects state entities from tort liability unless specific exceptions apply. The court noted that Hinckley’s claims for fraud and emotional distress were not exceptions under the Act. The opinion stated, "The WGCA bars Hinckley’s tort claims for money damages but does not bar her claims for injunctive relief." This means that while she cannot seek monetary damages, she may still pursue other forms of relief.

However, the court also ruled that Hinckley’s claim for wrongful termination was not valid because she had access to adequate statutory remedies under the Wyoming Fair Employment Practices Act (WFEPA). The court pointed out that WFEPA provides a process for individuals claiming discrimination to file complaints and seek remedies, including reinstatement and injunctive relief. Since Hinckley did not exhaust these administrative remedies, her claims were dismissed.

The ruling also addressed procedural issues in Hinckley’s appeal. The court noted that her notice of appeal contained technical deficiencies, which could have led to a summary affirmance of the lower court's decision. However, the court chose to consider the merits of her appeal despite these shortcomings. The opinion emphasized that while pro se litigants like Hinckley are afforded some leniency, they must still adhere to procedural rules.

This ruling has significant implications for employees seeking to challenge their treatment in the workplace, particularly those employed by state entities. It reinforces the importance of following established administrative processes and highlights the protective measures in place for governmental entities under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act.

Moving forward, Hinckley has limited options for further legal action. The court's decision is final, and while she may seek to pursue her claims through the appropriate administrative channels under WFEPA, the opportunity for judicial review of her claims in this context has been effectively closed. This ruling serves as a reminder for employees to be aware of their rights and the necessary steps to take when facing workplace grievances.