Contract4Deed Wiki

Wyoming

22 min read

Wyoming — Contract for Deed / Installment Land Contract

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources before acting. Statutes in this area are frequently amended. Last verified: 2026-06-08.

Wyoming has no contract-for-deed-specific statute — no statutory cancellation chapter (contrast washington RCW ch. 61.30 or Minnesota ch. 559), no prescribed disclosure schedule, and no codified cure period. The instrument is governed by general contract and real-property common law, and on that common law Wyoming is a strict-forfeiture / contract-governed jurisdiction: a clearly drafted forfeiture (and retained-payment “liquidated damages”) clause in a contract for deed is enforced according to its terms, and a court of equity will relieve the defaulting buyer only on “some special ground of equitable cognizance” (younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974; barker-v-johnson-1979; treemont-inc-v-hawley-1994). There is no automatic substantial-equity bar on forfeiture — the Skendzel rule (skendzel-v-marshall-1973) has not been adopted in Wyoming, and a large down payment “standing alone” does not defeat forfeiture (Younglove). The principal pro-buyer escape is the narrow equitable-mortgage doctrine: a buyer may avoid forfeiture only by proving the parties intended a security device (mortgage) rather than an installment sale (angus-hunt-ranch-v-reb-1978), and genuinely ambiguous arrangements are resolved toward mortgage treatment “in order to protect all parties by denial of forfeiture and affording statutory rights of redemption” (marple-v-wyoming-production-credit-1988).

0. Identity & Terminology

  • In-state name(s): “contract for deed” and “agreement for warranty deed” are the dominant Wyoming practice/judicial terms (the leading cases all involve an instrument styled “Contract for Deed” or “Agreement for Warranty Deed”: younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974, barker-v-johnson-1979, treemont-inc-v-hawley-1994). “Installment land contract” and “executory contract for the sale of lands” are the statutory/academic terms. The buyer is the vendee/purchaser/buyer; the seller is the vendor/seller.
  • Recognition: Common law (with statutory recognition of the category). Wyoming has no CFD-specific statute, but its conveyancing code expressly recognizes “executory contracts for the sale or purchase of lands” as a distinct instrument — excluded from the definition of “conveyance” (W.S. 34-1-102) yet separately made recordable when acknowledged (W.S. 34-1-104). — W.S. 34-1-102 / 34-1-104, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title34.pdf
  • Statutory home: There is no dedicated CFD chapter. The governing primary law is distributed: statute of frauds (W.S. 1-23-105(a)(v)); conveyance definition / executory-contract recordability (W.S. 34-1-102, 34-1-104); race-notice recording (W.S. 34-1-120, 34-1-121); mortgage foreclosure / power of sale (W.S. 34-4-101 et seq.) and statutory redemption (W.S. 1-18-103) — relevant only if a deal is recharacterized as a mortgage; interest/usury & UCCC (W.S. ch. 40-14); and mortgage-originator licensing (Wyoming Residential Mortgage Practices Act, W.S. 40-23-101 to -133). The remedy rule is case-law (Younglove/Barker/Treemont). — W.S. Titles 1, 34, 40, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title34.pdf
  • Remedy regime: strict_forfeiture (contract-governed). Wyoming enforces a contract-for-deed forfeiture clause per its terms on material breach after the contractual notice/cure; equity intervenes only on a proven special ground, and there is no statutory cure period or substantial-equity bar. — treemont-inc-v-hawley-1994, 886 P.2d 589 (Wyo. 1994), https://static.case.law/p2d/886/cases/0589-01.json; see forfeiture-vs-foreclosure.

1. Formation & Mandatory Disclosures

  • Statute of frauds: Writing required. “Every agreement or contract for the sale of real estate, or the lease thereof, for more than one (1) year” is void unless the agreement (or a note/memorandum) is in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged. — W.S. 1-23-105(a)(v), https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title01.pdf
  • Mandatory disclosures: None specific to contracts for deed, and no general mandatory seller property-condition disclosure statute. Wyoming has no CFD disclosure schedule of the Texas (§§ 5.069–5.070) or Minnesota (ch. 559A) type, and it is a caveat emptor state with no statute compelling a seller to deliver a property-condition disclosure form. The only statutory disclosure duty runs against a licensed real-estate broker/agent, who “shall disclose to any prospective buyer all adverse material facts actually known by the licensee” (title/physical condition/material defects/environmental hazards) — a duty of the licensee, not the FSBO seller. — W.S. 33-28-303, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title33.pdf
    • Penalty for omission: No CFD-specific penalty exists (no statute). A seller who actively conceals defects or misrepresents may face common-law fraud / Wyoming Consumer Protection Act exposure; a broker who breaches W.S. 33-28-303 faces license discipline and common-law liability. (No per-day or rescission penalty of the Texas/Minnesota type exists.) — see needs_verification.
  • Recording requirement: No CFD recording deadline; recording is permissive but priority-protective. An executory contract for the sale of land, when acknowledged, “may be recorded” (W.S. 34-1-104). Wyoming is a race-notice state: an unrecorded conveyance is “void, as against any subsequent purchaser … in good faith and for a valuable consideration … whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded” (W.S. 34-1-120), and a recorded instrument is notice to and takes precedence over subsequent purchasers from the time of delivery for record (W.S. 34-1-121). In practice the buyer records (the contract or a memorandum) to protect priority; there is no statute requiring the seller to record. — W.S. 34-1-104 / 34-1-120 / 34-1-121, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title34.pdf
  • Annual accounting statement: No statutory annual-accounting mandate for contracts for deed (no CFD statute exists). Accounting is contract-governed. — (absence; no Wyoming statute located.)
  • Prepayment: No CFD-specific prepayment statute. Prepayment and any prepayment penalty are governed by the contract and, for consumer credit, by the Uniform Consumer Credit Code (W.S. ch. 40-14). (No CFD prepayment-penalty prohibition located.) — see needs_verification.
  • Usury / interest cap: Wyoming has adopted the Uniform Consumer Credit Code (W.S. ch. 40-14); the default legal rate absent agreement is 7% per annum (W.S. 40-14-106(e)), but parties may agree in writing to the loan finance/credit-sale rate (W.S. 40-14-201 et seq., 40-14-301 et seq. for consumer credit). For a non-consumer seller-carry sale the agreed written rate generally governs. — W.S. 40-14-106, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title40.pdf; see needs_verification (exact UCCC consumer-credit-sale finance-charge ceiling and its application to a seller-financed installment land contract).

2. Buyer’s Equitable Interest

  • Equitable title passes / equitable conversion recognized: Yes. Under a Wyoming installment land contract, legal/absolute title remains in the seller as it is “vested in [the seller] subject only to the rights of the [buyer] under their contract,” while the buyer holds an equitable interest and possession (barker-v-johnson-1979; Baldwin v. McDonald, 24 Wyo. 108, 156 P. 27 (1916), cited therein). This is the equitable-conversion framework. — barker-v-johnson-1979, 591 P.2d 886 (Wyo. 1979), https://static.case.law/p2d/591/cases/0886-01.json; see equitable-conversion.
  • Buyer’s interest recordable: Yes — the acknowledged contract (or a memorandum) is recordable (W.S. 34-1-104) and recording protects priority under the race-notice act (W.S. 34-1-120). Note Younglove and Barker both show buyers recording the contract after default to cloud the seller’s title — which is why a seller’s post-forfeiture remedy commonly includes quiet title. — https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title34.pdf
  • Buyer’s interest insurable: Generally yes; vendee’s-interest and owner’s policies covering the equitable interest are available from Wyoming title insurers. — see needs_verification (insurer practice).
  • Risk of loss: Contract-governed. Under equitable conversion the equitable owner in possession ordinarily bears risk of loss absent a contrary clause; no Wyoming statute reverses this for CFDs. — see needs_verification (no controlling Wyoming risk-of-loss holding for CFDs retrieved).
  • Improvements and waste: The buyer in possession may improve the property but loses improvements on forfeiture; the seller may recover for waste (Wyoming remands for waste/gravel-removal damages in younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974). — https://static.case.law/p2d/526/cases/0689-01.json

3. Default & Remedies → see forfeiture-vs-foreclosure

  • Primary remedy: Contractual forfeiture (declare the contract null/void, retain payments as liquidated damages/rentals, recover possession, quiet title), as enforced in treemont-inc-v-hawley-1994 and barker-v-johnson-1979. Forfeiture is not statutory — it flows from the contract’s default clause, enforced under common law. A seller may alternatively sue for the price/balance or damages where the contract so provides (the Barker and Treemont default clauses gave the seller an election to accelerate-and-sue or declare void). — https://static.case.law/p2d/886/cases/0589-01.json
  • Forfeiture available? Yes — by contract, enforced per its terms. A material breach plus the contractually required notice/cure entitles the seller to forfeit; the buyer’s only defense is “some applicable equitable principle” that it must plead and prove (younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974, barker-v-johnson-1979). — https://static.case.law/p2d/591/cases/0886-01.json
    • Substantial-equity bar: None. Wyoming has not adopted the Skendzel substantial-equity rule (skendzel-v-marshall-1973). Younglove squarely holds a 29% down payment “standing alone” is insufficient to trigger equitable relief from forfeiture, and the Court is “hesitant to declare that a down payment amounting to 29 percent of a total purchase price standing alone is a fact sufficient to … sustain an application for equitable relief.” A buyer must show an independent equitable ground (fraud, waiver, estoppel, unclean hands), not merely accumulated equity. — younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974, 526 P.2d 689 (Wyo. 1974), https://static.case.law/p2d/526/cases/0689-01.json
  • Statutory cancellation: Does not exist. Wyoming has no statutory contract-for-deed cancellation/forfeiture procedure (no analogue to Minn. Stat. § 559.21 or RCW ch. 61.30). Cure, notice, and forfeiture are governed entirely by the contract terms (e.g., the 30-day-after-notice cure in Younglove, the 15-day-after-notice cure in Barker). — (absence; no Wyoming cancellation statute exists.)
  • Judicial foreclosure required when: Only when the instrument is recharacterized as a mortgage/equitable mortgage — i.e., when the buyer proves the parties intended a security device (angus-hunt-ranch-v-reb-1978) or the arrangement is genuinely ambiguous and resolved toward mortgage treatment (marple-v-wyoming-production-credit-1988). A mortgage must then be foreclosed (judicially or by power of sale, W.S. 34-4-101 et seq.) with the statutory right of redemption (3 months; 12 months for agricultural real estate over 80 acres) under W.S. 1-18-103. — https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title01.pdf
  • Acceleration enforceable? Yes, where contracted. The Barker and Treemont default clauses permitted the seller to “declare the entire unpaid balance … immediately due and payable” and sue, as an alternative to forfeiture; enforced per contract. — https://static.case.law/p2d/886/cases/0589-01.json
  • Restitution offset on forfeiture? Not required. On forfeiture the seller retains all payments as liquidated damages/rentals per the contract; Wyoming enforces such clauses without a mandatory restitution/refund of the buyer’s equity (Treemont; Younglove). The buyer’s protection is the equitable-ground defense and the equitable-mortgage doctrine, not a statutory offset. — https://static.case.law/p2d/886/cases/0589-01.json
  • Seller’s other remedies: specific performance / action for the price, damages, acceleration (where contracted), recovery of possession, and quiet title to clear a buyer’s recorded contract (Barker awards the seller quiet-title relief and contractual attorney fees). — https://static.case.law/p2d/591/cases/0886-01.json

▸ For Sellers / Operators — Wyoming is an operator-favorable, strict contract-governed forfeiture state: there is no statutory cancellation procedure to follow and no substantial-equity bar — your contract’s default clause is the remedy. The deal-defining facts are all in your drafting: include a clear forfeiture clause, a retained-payment liquidated-damages/rentals clause (enforced in treemont-inc-v-hawley-1994), a defined notice and cure mechanism (Wyoming courts enforce the contract’s own cure window — 30 days in Younglove, 15 days in Barker), and an attorney-fee/quiet-title clause (the buyer will likely record the contract to cloud title, so plan to quiet title after forfeiture). Two drafting cautions: (1) draft an unambiguous installment-sale instrument, not a security device — if a court reads it as an equitable mortgage (angus-hunt-ranch-v-reb-1978) or finds the arrangement genuinely doubtful (marple-v-wyoming-production-credit-1988), you lose forfeiture and must foreclose with redemption (3 months / 12 months agricultural, W.S. 1-18-103); and (2) confirm your federal Dodd-Frank/SAFE exposure (§4) — Wyoming’s own MLO law exempts seller-financers (W.S. 40-23-105(a)(ii)), but the federal thresholds apply independently.

▸ For Buyers — Your protections are thin and contractual, not statutory. There is no statutory cure period — read the contract’s notice/cure clause carefully and cure within it. A large down payment alone will not save you from forfeiture (younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974). Your real defenses are (a) a specific equitable ground (the seller’s fraud, waiver, unclean hands, or failure of its own obligations) and (b) the equitable-mortgage argument that the parties intended a security device, which yields foreclosure and a statutory redemption right (W.S. 1-18-103) instead of forfeiture. Record your contract or a memorandum to protect priority (W.S. 34-1-120).

3b. Remedies — Advanced

  • Election of remedies: Wyoming CFD default clauses typically give the seller an election between (a) accelerating/suing for the balance and (b) declaring the contract void and forfeiting payments (barker-v-johnson-1979, treemont-inc-v-hawley-1994). General election-of-remedies and waiver doctrine applies; pursuing one consistent remedy may bar inconsistent double-recovery. — see needs_verification (no Wyoming CFD holding squarely on election-of-remedies bar retrieved).
  • Deficiency after forfeiture: On forfeiture the seller keeps the property and the retained payments (liquidated damages) and does not separately pursue a deficiency on the price — the remedy is the bargain, not a money judgment (Treemont). If the seller instead accelerates and sues for the balance (treating it as a debt), or if the deal is recharacterized as a mortgage and foreclosed, ordinary debt/mortgage deficiency rules apply: on a power-of-sale or judicial foreclosure, the mortgagor “is liable for any deficiency” (W.S. ch. 34-4). — https://static.case.law/p2d/886/cases/0589-01.json; see needs_verification.
  • Anti-forfeiture / equitable relief from forfeiture: Available only on a proven special ground. “After competent parties have solemnly contracted … courts should exercise restraint in nullifying the terms,” and equity will not set aside a valid forfeiture stipulation “in the absence of some equitable basis”; relief is “a dangerous jurisdiction which should not be extended” (younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974). The buyer bears the burden. — https://static.case.law/p2d/526/cases/0689-01.json
  • Ejectment vs. eviction path: A pre-default CFD buyer is the equitable owner in possession (not a tenant), so the seller’s path to recover possession after a completed forfeiture runs through the contract remedy + possession/quiet title (as in Barker), not summary landlord-tenant eviction. Forcible entry/detainer (W.S. 1-21-1001 et seq.) addresses unlawful possession but does not itself adjudicate the forfeiture of an ownership-style equitable interest. — see needs_verification (precise Wyoming procedural vehicle for post-forfeiture possession against a holdover CFD buyer).
  • Quiet title after cancellation: Commonly required. Because the buyer often records the contract, the seller’s clean record title after forfeiture is secured by a quiet-title action; barker-v-johnson-1979 affirms quiet-title relief and contractual attorney fees where the buyer recorded after the forfeiture’s effective date. — https://static.case.law/p2d/591/cases/0886-01.json
  • Forfeited payments treatment: Enforced as liquidated damages / rentals per the contract, not struck as an unenforceable penalty, where the clause is clear (Treemont; Younglove). Wyoming has not applied a penalty-doctrine override to invalidate a CFD retained-payment clause in the cases retrieved. — see needs_verification (penalty-doctrine limits on disproportionate liquidated-damages in the CFD context).
  • Intervening seller-lien risk to buyer: The seller holds record legal title during the contract, so a judgment/lien against the seller can attach to the seller’s title; the buyer’s chief defense is recording the contract or memorandum (W.S. 34-1-120/121) to establish priority/notice. — see needs_verification.

4. Federal Overlay (as applied in-state) → see dodd-frank-seller-financing, safe-act-mlo, garn-st-germain-due-on-sale

  • Dodd-Frank exposure: Federal seller-financing rules apply in Wyoming with no special state carve-out from them. A natural-person seller financing one dwelling in 12 months may use the ≤1-property exclusion (no balloon limit, no ATR test); the ≤3-property exclusion (with ATR, no negative amortization, fixed or conforming-adjustable rate) is the next tier — per the seller-financer exclusions at 15 U.S.C. § 1602(dd)(2) and 12 C.F.R. § 1026.36(a)(4)–(5) / § 1026.43. — see dodd-frank-seller-financing.
  • SAFE Act MLO licensing: Wyoming administers mortgage-loan-originator licensing through the State Banking Commissioner / Division of Banking under the Wyoming Residential Mortgage Practices Act (W.S. 40-23-101 to -133), which defines “mortgage loan originator” consistent with the federal SAFE Act (W.S. 40-23-102(a)(xxvii)). Critically, the Act exempts from licensing “an owner of real property who offers credit secured by a contract of sale, mortgage or deed of trust on the property sold” — a complete state-law seller-financing exemption with no numeric property cap (W.S. 40-23-105(a)(ii)). State licensing therefore does not reach a Wyoming owner who sells on a contract for deed; the federal Dodd-Frank/SAFE thresholds, however, apply independently above the ≤1/≤3-property exclusions. — W.S. 40-23-102/-103/-105, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title40.pdf; see safe-act-mlo.
  • State consumer-protection overlay / CFPB enforcement notes: Wyoming has no CFD-specific predatory-sales statute (no Texas/Minnesota-style regime). The generally applicable overlays are the Wyoming Consumer Protection Act (W.S. ch. 40-12) for unfair/deceptive practices and common-law fraud. Post-2016 CFPB/state-AG scrutiny of predatory contract-for-deed selling (e.g. Harbour Portfolio) is the national compliance backdrop. — see needs_verification (precise W.S. ch. 40-12 application to a CFD has not been pinned to a Wyoming holding).

5. Title, Recording & Wraps → see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale

  • Memorandum recording: Permitted. An acknowledged executory land contract (or, in practice, a memorandum) may be recorded (W.S. 34-1-104), and recording protects priority under the race-notice act (W.S. 34-1-120). There is no prescribed statutory memorandum form. — https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title34.pdf
  • Garn-St. Germain due-on-sale: A contract for deed is a transfer that can trigger a due-on-sale clause in an underlying loan; Garn-St. Germain (12 U.S.C. § 1701j-3) preempts state restrictions and makes due-on-sale clauses generally enforceable, subject to the enumerated residential exemptions (which do not cover an installment land contract where the borrower parts with occupancy/possession). No Wyoming statute restricts due-on-sale enforcement. — see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale.
  • Underlying-mortgage / wrap: Wrap-around contracts for deed over an existing mortgage are permitted in Wyoming but carry the standard risk: the senior lender may call or foreclose the underlying loan on a due-on-sale trigger even if the buyer pays the seller on time, and a senior foreclosure can wipe the buyer’s junior equitable interest. No Wyoming statute conditions a wrap on lender consent; disclosure and payment escrow are contractual best practice. — see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale.
  • Deed delivery: The seller retains legal title and conveys by warranty deed at payoff; escrow of the executed deed with a bank/escrow agent (as in Younglove) is the common Wyoming mechanism. — https://static.case.law/p2d/526/cases/0689-01.json
  • Marketable title at payoff: The seller must convey marketable title at payoff; the recorded contract plus the fulfillment/warranty deed clears the chain.
  • Title insurance: Available to buyers (vendee’s-interest and, at payoff, owner’s policies) through Wyoming title insurers. — see needs_verification.
  • Seller death / bankruptcy effect: The seller’s interest (legal title + payment stream) passes to the estate or bankruptcy estate subject to the buyer’s recorded equitable interest and right to the deed at payoff. — see needs_verification.

6. Tax Treatment

  • IRC § 453 installment reporting: A contract for deed is an installment sale; a non-dealer seller may report gain under IRC § 453 as principal is collected (dealer-property and other exceptions apply). The Younglove Court even took judicial notice of “the rules of the Internal Revenue Service with reference to the accounting for profits on installment sales.” — 26 U.S.C. § 453, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/453; see irc-453-installment-sale.
  • Property-tax responsibility: Contract-governed; in practice the buyer in possession (equitable owner) pays property tax. (Wyoming property-tax statutes, W.S. Title 39, assess the owner of record; allocation is set by the contract.) — see needs_verification (precise W.S. Title 39 treatment of equitable owner).
  • Homestead exemption for equitable owner: Wyoming’s homestead exemption (W.S. 1-20-101 et seq.) protects a homestead held by a resident; whether a CFD buyer’s equitable interest qualifies has not been pinned to a controlling Wyoming holding here. — see needs_verification.
  • Transfer / documentary-stamp tax: None. Wyoming imposes no real-estate transfer or documentary-stamp tax on a deed or contract (one of a handful of states with no such tax); recording is a flat per-document county fee. — see needs_verification (confirm no county-level transfer tax has been enacted).
  • Mortgage registration tax: None — Wyoming imposes no mortgage recording/registration tax; recording is a flat per-document recorder fee.

7. Bankruptcy & Death / Divorce

  • Buyer bankruptcy: Whether a Wyoming contract for deed is an executory contract (11 U.S.C. § 365) or a secured debt in the buyer’s bankruptcy is subject to the national split. Wyoming’s equitable-conversion view — buyer holds equitable title, seller holds legal title (barker-v-johnson-1979) — could support either characterization; no controlling Wyoming-specific bankruptcy holding was retrieved. — see needs_verification.
  • Seller bankruptcy: The seller’s interest enters the estate subject to the buyer’s recorded equitable interest and right to the deed at payoff. — see needs_verification.
  • Assignability by buyer: The buyer’s equitable interest is generally assignable subject to contract terms; anti-assignment and due-on-sale clauses are enforced per their terms (and the federal Garn-St. Germain overlay for underlying loans). — see needs_verification (Wyoming holding on CFD anti-assignment clauses).
  • Survivorship / divorce treatment: The buyer’s equitable interest is real property that passes by will/intestacy and is divisible marital property on divorce; Wyoming is an equitable-distribution state (W.S. 20-2-114). — see needs_verification.

8. Case Law (real, verified)

CaseYearTopicHolding (plain English)Source
younglove-v-graham-and-hill-19741974forfeitureA clear forfeiture clause in a contract for deed is enforced per its terms; equity relieves only on a “special ground”; a 29% down payment alone is not enough.https://static.case.law/p2d/526/cases/0689-01.json
barker-v-johnson-19791979forfeiture / equitable_interestMaterial breach + notice = enforceable forfeiture; buyer cannot convert a CFD to an equitable mortgage without proof the parties intended a security; seller gets possession + quiet title.https://static.case.law/p2d/591/cases/0886-01.json
treemont-inc-v-hawley-19941994forfeitureModern affirmance: where default terms are clear, the court will not controvert them — termination and forfeiture of all payments enforced on a large-dollar deal.https://static.case.law/p2d/886/cases/0589-01.json
angus-hunt-ranch-v-reb-19781978foreclosure / equitable_interestThe equitable-mortgage exception: a CFD is treated as a mortgage only if the parties intended a security device; there is “little possibility” a court will construe an ordinary installment land contract as a mortgage.https://static.case.law/p2d/577/cases/0645-01.json
marple-v-wyoming-production-credit-19881988equitable_interestTiebreaker: a genuinely ambiguous security arrangement is “in case of doubt … defined as a mortgage … by denial of forfeiture and affording statutory rights of redemption.”https://static.case.law/p2d/750/cases/1315-01.json

9. Edge Cases (state-specific notes)

  • Equitable-mortgage recharacterization — Wyoming’s principal pro-buyer doctrine: a contract for deed becomes a foreclosable mortgage (with W.S. 1-18-103 redemption) only on proof the parties intended a security (angus-hunt-ranch-v-reb-1978), or where the instrument is genuinely doubtful (marple-v-wyoming-production-credit-1988). Operators avoid this by drafting unambiguous installment-sale instruments.
  • No substantial-equity bar — unlike Skendzel states, Wyoming will forfeit even where the buyer has paid substantial sums; the down payment “standing alone” is not an equitable ground (younglove-v-graham-and-hill-1974).
  • Recording to cloud title — buyers commonly record the contract after default; sellers should anticipate a quiet-title action post-forfeiture (barker-v-johnson-1979).
  • garn-st-germain-due-on-sale — a CFD/wrap can trigger a due-on-sale clause; no Wyoming statute restricts enforcement.
  • Agricultural redemption (12 months) — if a deal over 80 agricultural acres is recharacterized as a mortgage, the redemption period is 12 months, not 3 (W.S. 1-18-103).
  • (Add: manufactured/mobile-home CFDs; SCRA servicemember protections; FED/unlawful detainer interplay with an equitable owner.)

10. Operations

  • Where records live: County Clerk (recorder of deeds) where the land sits; acknowledged contracts, memoranda, and deeds are recorded there (W.S. 34-1-104, 34-1-120). — https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title34.pdf
  • Recorder / agency portals: County Clerk recording offices (e.g., Laramie, Natrona, Campbell, Sheridan, Teton counties); MLO licensing is administered by the Wyoming Division of Banking / State Banking Commissioner via NMLS (W.S. 40-23-103). — W.S. 40-23-103, https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title40.pdf
  • Who may draft (UPL notes): CFD forms are sold/standardized, but because the forfeiture remedy is wholly contract-driven (notice, cure, liquidated-damages, acceleration, attorney-fee, and quiet-title clauses all matter), drafting and enforcement for others by non-attorneys risks UPL exposure; the litigated Wyoming cases turned on contract wording.
  • Typical costs: County recorder per-document fees; no transfer/stamp tax; reinstatement/cure is governed by the contract’s own cure clause; quiet-title and attorney fees (often contractually shifted to a defaulting buyer, as in Barker).
  • Typical timelines: Cure runs on the contract’s clock (e.g., 30 days in Younglove, 15 days in Barker); if recharacterized as a mortgage, foreclosure plus 3-month (or 12-month agricultural) redemption applies (W.S. 1-18-103).
  • Key agencies: County Clerk (recording); Wyoming Division of Banking (MLO/SAFE); Wyoming Real Estate Commission (broker licensing/disclosure, W.S. ch. 33-28); Wyoming Attorney General (Consumer Protection Act).
  • Useful forms: Acknowledged contract for deed / agreement for warranty deed; memorandum of contract; notice of default (contract-prescribed); warranty/fulfillment deed held in escrow; quiet-title pleadings.

11. Meta

Disclaimer. This page is legal information, not legal advice, and may be out of date. Wyoming has no contract-for-deed-specific statute; remedies are governed by the contract and general common law, and the forfeiture/equitable-mortgage line turns on the instrument’s drafting and the facts. Consult a licensed Wyoming attorney before drafting, enforcing, or signing a contract for deed.

Graph View

Backlinks