How to calculate Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Wyoming

Quick takeaways

• Wyoming’s offer of judgment framework is governed by Wyo. R. Civ. P. 68 (often referred to as “Rule 68”).
• In Wyoming, a defending party may serve an offer “at any time more than 14 days before the trial begins.”
• The rule’s cost-shifting effects hinge on whether the offer is handled within 14 days after service (the statute text includes an “If within 14 days…” clause).
• DocketMath’s Offer Of Judgment Analyzer (US-WY) is built to model the rule timing and the offer vs. judgment comparison, so you can estimate potential cost exposure and pressure-test outcomes.

Inputs you need

To run the Offer Of Judgment Analyzer (US-WY) in DocketMath, collect the inputs below. Wyoming’s Rule 68 timing is sensitive, so date accuracy matters.

Case and outcome inputs

• Offer amount (the dollar amount or the “effect specified in the offer”)
• Judgment amount to compare against the offer

  • Typically the final judgment figure you expect to be compared to the offer in the Rule 68 modeling you’re doing.
• Offer served by the defendant

  • Wyoming’s rule excerpt provided frames offers as being served by “a party defending against a claim.”

Timing inputs (Wyoming-specific)

• Trial start date (the date the trial begins in your matter)
• Offer service date (the date the offer is served on the adverse party)
• Acceptance date (if modeling an accepted offer), or
• Rejection/expiration date (if modeling an offer not accepted within the rule window)

Cost and fee inputs for modeling

Because Rule 68 references “costs then accrued” and can involve cost-shifting, the analyzer may need cost inputs for a more realistic estimate:

• Costs accrued up to the relevant trigger date (if you want to model “costs then accrued”)
• Additional taxable costs assumptions (optional, depending on how you’re using DocketMath)

If you don’t track costs in real dollars, you can still run a comparison-focused scenario (offer vs. judgment), but dollar-level precision will be limited.

How the calculation works

DocketMath’s Offer Of Judgment Analyzer (US-WY) follows the structure of Wyo. R. Civ. P. 68: it first tests whether the offer was served within the permissible time window, then compares the offer to the case outcome (judgment amount / effect) to estimate likely cost consequences.

1) Apply Wyoming’s default timing rule (no claim-type-specific sub-rule found)

Your jurisdiction notes indicate no claim-type-specific sub-rule was found, so the calculator should use the general default period rather than adding branches based on the type of claim.

From the provided rule text, the practical timing model is:

• The offer may be served if it is more than 14 days before trial begins.
• The rule then references “If within 14 days…” (governing the subsequent consequence depending on acceptance/rejection).

Practical translation for the calculator:

• Eligibility check:
  offer_service_date < (trial_start_date - 14 days)
• Acceptance/trigger window check:
  acceptance_or_effect_date <= (offer_service_date + 14 days)

2) Compare the offer to the judgment outcome

Rule 68’s logic turns on whether the result obtained after the offer is favorable relative to the offer.

In the DocketMath analyzer workflow, you typically:

• Enter the offer amount
• Enter the judgment amount to analyze
• The analyzer then indicates whether the modeled outcome is favorable/unfavorable relative to the offer, and pairs that with the timing results to estimate the direction of cost exposure.

Key caution: Rule 68 can apply to the “money or property or to the effect specified in the offer.” If your offer is framed in terms of an outcome other than a simple fixed dollar number, make sure the “offer amount” field in the tool is aligned with the “effect specified” concept you’re modeling.

3) Incorporate “costs then accrued”

Your rule excerpt explicitly references:

• Offers that include “costs then accrued.”

To model this more accurately in DocketMath:

• Enter costs accrued up to the relevant trigger date.
• If you enter $0 (or omit costs), the tool may still show a timing/favorable-direction result, but the estimated dollar cost impact will likely be understated.

4) Interpret the outputs you should expect

A typical run of the Offer Of Judgment Analyzer (US-WY) produces components like:

• Timing compliance result

  • Example: “Served more than 14 days before trial” ✅ / ❌
• 14-day acceptance window result

  • Example: “Accepted within 14 days” ✅ / “Not accepted within 14 days” ✅
• Offer vs. judgment comparison

  • Example: “Judgment more favorable than offer” vs. the opposite
• Estimated cost exposure

  • Example: “Potential additional costs risk” (based on your timing and cost inputs)

Common pitfalls

These are the most common issues that distort Rule 68 calculations in Wyoming when using an analyzer.

1) Off-by-one (or formatting) date mistakes around the 14-day rule

Because the key terms are “more than 14 days before trial” and “within 14 days,” small date errors can flip eligibility.

Checklist:

• You entered the offer service date (not the mailing date).
• You subtracted exactly 14 days from the trial start date when testing “more than.”
• You treated “more than” correctly (not “14 or fewer”).

2) Treating the rule as claim-type dependent

Your notes state no claim-type-specific sub-rule was found, so you should not add branching logic based on claim category.

Checklist:

• You used the same general default timing rule regardless of claim type.

3) Using the wrong “judgment amount” for comparison

Cases can have multiple numbers (jury totals, amended figures, interest, partial dispositions, offsets).

Checklist:

• The “judgment amount” you entered is the amount your modeling plan intends to compare under Rule 68.

4) Ignoring “costs then accrued”

If costs are omitted or entered as $0, the analyzer may still show favorability/timing outcomes, but dollar exposure won’t match reality.

Checklist:

• You entered estimated taxable costs accrued (to the extent you want a dollar estimate).

5) Modeling the wrong party posture for the offer

The provided excerpt frames offers as being served by “a party defending against a claim.” If your scenario doesn’t match that, treat results cautiously.

Checklist:

• You confirmed which side served the offer in your matter.

Sources and references

• Wyo. R. Civ. P. 68 (Offer of Judgment)
  Source PDF: https://www.courts.state.wy.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Rules_Civil_Procedure.pdf
  Rule excerpt used in this guide includes: “At any time more than 14 days before the trial begins…” and “If within 14 days…”, as well as reference to “costs then accrued.”

Next steps

1. Open DocketMath’s tool here: /tools/offer-of-judgment-analyzer
2. Enter:

   • Offer amount
   • Judgment amount
   • Offer service date
   • Trial start date
   • Acceptance date (or the date you want the tool to use for the relevant trigger)
3. Run an initial scenario using only the core date + amount inputs to confirm timing eligibility.
4. Refine with costs:

   • Add costs then accrued inputs if you want a more realistic dollar estimate.
5. Save your assumptions:

   • Keep track of the dates you entered so you can update quickly if trial or judgment dates change.

Related reading

• How to calculate Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Philippines — Full how-to guide with jurisdiction-specific rules
• Worked example: Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Philippines — Worked example with real statute citations
• Inputs you need for Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Philippines — Input checklist with sourcing guidance