dissenting.
I join with Justice Cardine in his dissenting opinion in this case. In addition I point out that the case has been before seven justices of the Supreme Court of the State of Wyoming. Initially three justices voted to reverse the case and an opinion reflecting that view was filed. Thereafter, a rehearing was granted which involved two different justices and they joined with a prior dissenting justice to form a new majority. It is my position that that style of divergence réflects that this was a close case in terms of a sufficiency of the record to justify a finding by the jury of gross negligence. It demonstrates that the case was so close that the jury should have been permitted to decide the issue.