Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201 (2026)

Disposition and maintenance of children in

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
decree or order; access to records.

     (a) In granting a divorce, separation or annulment of a
marriage or upon the establishment of paternity pursuant to W.S.
14-2-401 through 14-2-907, the court may make by decree or order
any disposition of the children that appears most expedient and
in the best interests of the children. In determining the best
interests of the child, the court shall consider, but is not
limited to, the following factors:

          (i) The quality of the relationship each child has
with each parent;

          (ii) The ability of each parent to provide adequate
care for each child throughout each period of responsibility,
including arranging for each child's care by others as needed;

          (iii)    The relative competency and fitness of each
parent;

          (iv) Each parent's willingness to accept all
responsibilities of parenting, including a willingness to accept
care for each child at specified times and to relinquish care to
the other parent at specified times;

          (v) How the parents and each child can best maintain
and strengthen a relationship with each other;

          (vi) How the parents and each child interact and
communicate with each other and how such interaction and
communication may be improved;

          (vii) The ability and willingness of each parent to
allow the other to provide care without intrusion, respect the
other parent's rights and responsibilities, including the right
to privacy;

          (viii)    Geographic distance between the parents'
residences;

          (ix) The current physical and mental ability of each
parent to care for each child;
          (x) Whether either parent has a conviction for which
the parent must register as a sex offender under W.S. 7-19-301
through 7-19-310;

            (xi)   Any other factors the court deems necessary and
relevant.

     (b) In any proceeding in which the custody of a child is
at issue the court shall not prefer one (1) parent as a
custodian solely because of gender.

     (c) The court shall consider evidence of spousal abuse or
child abuse as being contrary to the best interest of the
children. If the court finds that family violence has occurred,
the court shall make arrangements for visitation that best
protects the children and the abused spouse from further harm.

     (d) The court shall order custody in well defined terms to
promote understanding and compliance by the parties. In
determining custody a court shall not favor or disfavor any form
of custody. Custody shall be crafted to promote the best
interests of the children, and may include any combination of
joint, shared or sole custody.

     (e) Unless otherwise ordered by the court, the
noncustodial parent shall have the same right of access as the
parent awarded custody to any records relating to the child of
the parties, including school records, activities, teachers and
teachers' conferences as well as medical and dental treatment
providers and mental health records.

     (f) At any time the court may require parents to attend
appropriate parenting classes, including but not limited to,
parenting classes to lessen the effects of divorce on children.

     (g) At anytime a court is considering the custody or
visitation rights of a service member, as defined by W.S.
20-2-205, the court shall comply with W.S. 20-2-205.

     (h) A court finding of physical placement of a child in a
child support order shall not be considered a disposition of
custody under this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 115 cases (29 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022).
Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022). · cites it 21× “While “the district court touched on some of the statutory [best interest] factors” under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 , it “ignored at least two” that were critical to its shared custody decision given “Dr.”
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). · cites it 17× “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
Bruegman v. Bruegman, 417 P.3d 157 (Wyo. 2018). · cites it 10× “" Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (d) (LexisNexis 2017).”
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). · cites it 13× “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
Tyler R. Kimzey v. Shelby K. Kimzey, 2020 WY 52 (Wyo. 2020). · cites it 9× “§ 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2019): In determining the best interests of the child, the court shall consider, but is not limited to, the following factors: (i) The quality of the relationship each child has with each parent; (ii) The ability of each parent to provide adequate care…”
Stonham v. Widiastuti, 2003 WY 157 (Wyo. 2003). · cites it 18× “The district court stated that in reaching this conclusion, it had considered the applicable custody factors set forth in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (LexisNexis 2001), and made the following findings: Mother has been the primary caretaker of the children; *1192 Mother is better…”
Elisha Schlafke Baer v. John S. Baer Iii, 2022 WY 165 (Wyo. 2022). · cites it 17× “Using the factors set out in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021), the district court found it was in the children’s best interests to remain 5 in Father’s custody.”
Todd Andrew Domenico v. Josie Daniel f/k/a Josie Daniel Domenico, 2024 WY 2 (Wyo. 2024). · cites it 25× “” Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (ix). [¶33] Relevant evidence is “evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
Ianelli v. Camino, 444 P.3d 61 (Wyo. 2019). · cites it 8× “, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), (c) (LexisNexis 2017) (statutory factors, spousal abuse, and child abuse); Martin v.”
Kappen v. Kappen, 2015 WY 3 (Wyo. 2015). · cites it 14× “The district court cannot consider the best interest factors set forth in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2013) unless and until it has determined that a material change in circumstances has occurred.”
Zupan v. Zupan, 2010 WY 59 (Wyo. 2010). · cites it 14× “[¶ 14] In every case, the district court must base its child custody determinations in the best interests of the children using the factors enumerated in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a). No single factor is determinative.”
Brandon Lee Jensen v. Margaret E. Milatzo-Jensen, 2013 WY 27 (Wyo. 2013). · cites it 10× “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 . Although not specifically referenced, the district court’s analysis dovetails with those factors identified in Wyo.”
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a) — 55 cases
Tyler R. Kimzey v. Shelby K. Kimzey, 2020 WY 52 (Wyo. 2020). “§ 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2019): In determining the best interests of the child, the court shall consider, but is not limited to, the following factors: (i) The quality of the relationship each child has with each parent; (ii) The ability of each parent to provide adequate care…”
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
Fergusson v. Fergusson, 2002 WY 66 (Wyo. 2002).
Produit v. Produit, 2001 WY 123 (Wyo. 2001).
Jackson v. Jackson, 2004 WY 99 (Wyo. 2004).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(c) — 1 case
Zeitner v. Shank, 290 P.3d 180 (Wyo. 2012).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(i) — 7 cases
Ianelli v. Camino, 444 P.3d 61 (Wyo. 2019). “, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), (c) (LexisNexis 2017) (statutory factors, spousal abuse, and child abuse); Martin v.”
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022). “While “the district court touched on some of the statutory [best interest] factors” under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 , it “ignored at least two” that were critical to its shared custody decision given “Dr.”
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(ifm) — 1 case
Pahl v. Pahl, 2004 WY 40 (Wyo. 2004).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(ii) — 2 cases
Jt v. Kd, 2008 WY 104 (Wyo. 2008).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(iii) — 6 cases
Elisha Schlafke Baer v. John S. Baer Iii, 2022 WY 165 (Wyo. 2022). “Using the factors set out in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021), the district court found it was in the children’s best interests to remain 5 in Father’s custody.”
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(iv) — 8 cases
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
James L. Hyatt v. Tara M. Hyatt, 2023 WY 129 (Wyo. 2023).
Bishop v. Bishop, 404 P.3d 1170 (Wyo. 2017).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(ix) — 3 cases
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(v) — 4 cases
Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022). “While “the district court touched on some of the statutory [best interest] factors” under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 , it “ignored at least two” that were critical to its shared custody decision given “Dr.”
Pahl v. Pahl, 2004 WY 40 (Wyo. 2004).
Roemmich v. Roemmich, 2010 WY 115 (Wyo. 2010).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(vi) — 4 cases
Tyler R. Kimzey v. Shelby K. Kimzey, 2020 WY 52 (Wyo. 2020). “§ 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2019): In determining the best interests of the child, the court shall consider, but is not limited to, the following factors: (i) The quality of the relationship each child has with each parent; (ii) The ability of each parent to provide adequate care…”
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022). “While “the district court touched on some of the statutory [best interest] factors” under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 , it “ignored at least two” that were critical to its shared custody decision given “Dr.”
Pahl v. Pahl, 2004 WY 40 (Wyo. 2004).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(vii) — 5 cases
Bruegman v. Bruegman, 417 P.3d 157 (Wyo. 2018). “" Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (d) (LexisNexis 2017).”
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022). “While “the district court touched on some of the statutory [best interest] factors” under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 , it “ignored at least two” that were critical to its shared custody decision given “Dr.”
Pahl v. Pahl, 2004 WY 40 (Wyo. 2004).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(viii) — 1 case
Tyler R. Kimzey v. Shelby K. Kimzey, 2020 WY 52 (Wyo. 2020). “§ 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2019): In determining the best interests of the child, the court shall consider, but is not limited to, the following factors: (i) The quality of the relationship each child has with each parent; (ii) The ability of each parent to provide adequate care…”
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(a)(x) — 5 cases
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
Womack v. Swan, 413 P.3d 127 (Wyo. 2018). “After considering the factors provided by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a), the district court granted primary custody of the children to Father and reduced Mother's visitation.”
Bryan Pettengill v. Cortni Castellow, 2022 WY 144 (Wyo. 2022). “While “the district court touched on some of the statutory [best interest] factors” under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 , it “ignored at least two” that were critical to its shared custody decision given “Dr.”
Roemmich v. Roemmich, 2010 WY 115 (Wyo. 2010).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(b) — 1 case
Donnelly v. Donnelly, 2004 WY 72 (Wyo. 2004).
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(c) — 10 cases
Jackson v. Jackson, 2004 WY 99 (Wyo. 2004).
Gjertsen v. Haar, 2015 WY 56 (Wyo. 2015).
Bingham v. Bingham, 2007 WY 145 (Wyo. 2007).
Elisha Schlafke Baer v. John S. Baer Iii, 2022 WY 165 (Wyo. 2022). “Using the factors set out in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021), the district court found it was in the children’s best interests to remain 5 in Father’s custody.”
Vanessa Taulo-Millar v. Kormakur Hognason, 2022 WY 8 (Wyo. 2022). “See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021).”
— Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(d) — 2 cases
Elisha Schlafke Baer v. John S. Baer Iii, 2022 WY 165 (Wyo. 2022). “Using the factors set out in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201 (a) (LexisNexis 2021), the district court found it was in the children’s best interests to remain 5 in Father’s custody.”
Everitts v. Ininns, 2008 WY 41 (Wyo. 2008).
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.