Wyo. Stat. » Wyo. Stat. / Title 01 - Civil Procedure / Chapter 5 - VENUE / Article
Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 1-5-101 (2026)

Actions to be brought where real property

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
situated; exceptions.

     (a) Actions for the following causes shall be brought in
the county in which the subject of the action is situate, except
as provided in W.S. 1-5-102 and 1-5-103:

          (i) For the recovery of real property, or of an
estate or interest therein;
           (ii)    For the partition of real property;

          (iii) For the sale of real property under a mortgage,
lien or other encumbrance or charge.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1979–2020 · leading case: Kelvin Bourke v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., LP, Now Known as Precision Drilling Co., LP, 2013 WY 93 (Wyo. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kelvin Bourke v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., LP, Now Known as Precision Drilling Co., LP, 2013 WY 93 (Wyo. 2013). · cites it 4× “§ 1-5-101 (LexisNexis 2013) (actions for recovery, partition or sale of real property under a mortgage, lien or encumbrance); § 1-5-104 (actions for recovery of a fine, against a public officer, or on the bond or undertaking of a public officer); § 1-5-108 (actions not otherwise…”
Sundance Mountain Resort, Inc. v. Union Tel. Co., 2007 WY 11 (Wyo. 2007). · cites it 4× “Thus, it was an action affecting an interest in real property and Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-5-101 (LexisNexis 2005) was the controlling venue provision.”
Black Diamond Energy of Delaware Inc., a Foreign Corp. v. Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n, 2020 WY 45 (Wyo. 2020). · cites it 2× “§ 1-5-105 (“An action, other than those mentioned in W.S. 1-5-101 through 1-5-103, against a corporation created under the laws of this state may be brought in the county in which the corporation is situate or has its principal office or place of business.”
Saunders v. Saunders, 445 P.3d 991 (Wyo. 2019). · cites it 2× “3d at 195 ( Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-5-101 ); State Farm Mut.”
Spear v. Nicholson, 882 P.2d 1237 (Wyo. 1994). · cites it 5× “On this issue the debate between the children and the widow and her son and other appellees is whether the applicable statute is Wyo.Stat. § 1-5-101 (1988) or Wyo.Stat. § 1-5-107 (1988).”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Kunz, 186 P.3d 378 (Wyo. 2008). · cites it 2× “" See generally Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 1-5-101 through -109. In contrast, other Wyoming statutory and constitutional provisions addressing jurisdiction do not refer to the county or locality in which the court is located, but rather to the type of court that has jurisdiction.”
Burnham v. Coffinberry, 2003 WY 109 (Wyo. 2003). · cites it 2× “As to one of the properties at issue, Burnham and Coffinber-ry were cotenants and Burnham had deeded several other properties at issue to Coffin-berry.”
First Sw. Fin. Servs. v. Laird, 882 P.2d 1211 (Wyo. 1994). · cites it 3× “§ 1-5-101(a)(iii) (1988), [2] venue was proper in Converse County because its complaint sought to foreclose upon a mortgage on real property located in that county.”
Jacobsen Const. Co., Inc. v. Teton Builders, 2005 UT 4 (Utah 2005). “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-5-101 (2004). Teton contends that this statute expresses Wyoming's policy that all litigation relevant to a lien should be conducted in the county where the lien foreclosure action is commenced.”
Steven Aron & Galen Woelk, Affiliated Attorneys At Law & Aron & Hennig, Llp, a Wyoming Ltd. Liab. P'ship v. Spencer Willey & Ethan G. Willey & Alexus N. Willey, Minor Child., By & Through Their Next Friend, Stephanie Withrow, 2019 WY 122 (Wyo. 2019). · cites it 5× “We decisively rejected any argument that we should read the 4 In addition to Aron and Woelk’s argument that § 1-5-105 applies, which we questioned but did not rule on for the reasons stated above, the Willeys argued to the district court that venue was proper in Sheridan County…”
Baker v. First Nat'l Bank of Denver, 603 P.2d 397 (Wyo. 1979). · cites it 2× “51 (1979). I find that the treatises support the rule that the statute of limitations of the state in which real property is located will control with respect to an action to foreclose a mortgage on such property.”
— Wyo. Stat. § 1-5-101(a)(i) — 1 case
Steven Aron & Galen Woelk, Affiliated Attorneys At Law & Aron & Hennig, Llp, a Wyoming Ltd. Liab. P'ship v. Spencer Willey & Ethan G. Willey & Alexus N. Willey, Minor Child., By & Through Their Next Friend, Stephanie Withrow, 2019 WY 122 (Wyo. 2019). “We decisively rejected any argument that we should read the 4 In addition to Aron and Woelk’s argument that § 1-5-105 applies, which we questioned but did not rule on for the reasons stated above, the Willeys argued to the district court that venue was proper in Sheridan County…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 1-5-101(a)(iii) — 1 case
First Sw. Fin. Servs. v. Laird, 882 P.2d 1211 (Wyo. 1994). “§ 1-5-101(a)(iii) (1988), [2] venue was proper in Converse County because its complaint sought to foreclose upon a mortgage on real property located in that county.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.