Summary 2007 WY 34

Summary of Decision issued March 2, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance with a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Wayt v. Urbigkit

Citation: 2007 WY 34

Docket Number: 06-125

Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County, the Honorable Scott W. Skavdahl, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff): Pro se.

Representing Appellee (Defendant): Marvin L. Bishop, III of Bishop, Bishop & Yaap, Casper, Wyoming.

Issues: Whether the district court erred in holding Wayt has failed to present clear, cogent, and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption that his signature on the notarized Warranty Deed is valid. Whether the district court erred in granting Urbigkit’s Motion for Summary Judgment by holding that since Wayt stated under oath he transferred the real property to Urbigkit by Warranty Deed that he is not allowed to recant in an effort to regain title to the property.

Facts/Discussion: Wayt appeals from the district court’s summary judgment order quieting title to certain Natrona County real property in Urbigkit. Wayt claimed that a warranty deed which conveyed property from him to Urbigkit was forged and was not supported by adequate consideration. The district court relied upon the statutory presumption of correctness afforded to documents supported by a notary’s certificate and granted summary judgment in favor of Urbigkit. The district court also concluded Wayt could not take the position that he did not sign the deed when he had admitted he made the conveyance in the prior civil action.
Standard of Review: On appeal the Court reviews a district court summary judgment order de novo.
Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 32-1-107, if any document is notarized, the facts contained in the notary’s certificate are presumed correct. To rebut the presumption that the facts contained in the notary’s certification are true, the challenging party must provide cogent, clear and convincing evidence of their falsity. There is a presumption in favor of the correctness of a notary’s certificate. Wayt’s evidence does not prove that his signature was never notarized, rather it establishes there may be a question of fact about the date the deed was signed and acknowledged. Moreover, Wayt’s sworn statement in the lis pendens notice effectively prevents him from being able to meet the clear and convincing evidence standard necessary to overcome the presumption the facts contained in the notary certificate were true.
Wayt also claims summary judgment was improper because issues of fact existed as to the adequacy of the consideration for the conveyance. The factual dispute about the type or amount of the consideration for the deed was irrelevant. The deed included the recital the conveyance was made in consideration of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration and Wayt acknowledged receipt of the consideration. That acknowledgement was prima facie evidence of that fact. Wayt did not present any evidence, other than his own uncorroborated statement, to rebut the presumption that he received consideration for the conveyance. Consequently, no issues of material fact existed as to the adequacy of the consideration.
Moreover, the law is well established that, as between the parties, a deed for conveyance of real property is good without consideration so long as there is no wrongful act, such as fraud or undue influence, on the part of the grantee.

Holding: The district court properly granted Urbigkit’s summary judgment motion and quieted title to the property in her.

Affirmed.

J. Kite delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2dqdzw .