A recent appellate decision has confirmed that two property buyers must forfeit their rights to a parcel of land after failing to meet payment obligations under an amended land contract. The case highlights the importance of adhering to contractual terms and statutory deadlines in real estate transactions involving installment payments.
The complaint was filed by CRS Properties LLC in Sawyer County Circuit Court on May 26, 2022, naming William J. Mossuto and Lisa Mossuto as defendants. The circuit court, presided over by Judge Monica M. Isham, granted summary judgment in favor of CRS Properties, allowing strict foreclosure on the property and dismissing all counterclaims brought by the Mossutos. The Court of Appeals affirmed this judgment on March 24, 2026.
According to court documents, William Mossuto originally agreed to purchase several lots from CRS Properties under a land contract recorded on June 28, 2013. The contract required monthly payments of $635 for principal and interest over twelve years, with additional monthly payments toward property taxes and insurance. Title would not transfer until full performance of the contract by June 1, 2025.
On October 25, 2014, a fire destroyed a home on the property while it was uninsured. Following this loss, the parties amended their agreement in February 2015: CRS Properties loaned $55,000 to William and his wife Lisa (who was added to the contract) for reconstruction costs. This increased the total principal due to $120,000 at an interest rate of 6.25%, with monthly installments raised to $800 plus $50 toward insurance and taxes.
Between July 2013 and August 2021, the Mossutos paid more than $62,000 toward principal and interest but eventually fell behind on payments. CRS Properties alleged that no payments had been made for over nine months before filing for strict foreclosure in May 2022.
In response, William and Lisa Mossuto filed multiple counterclaims against CRS Properties—including intentional misrepresentation, civil theft, slander of title, unjust enrichment—and third-party claims against two employees of CRS Properties for breach of contract and civil theft. Their claims centered on allegations that CRS Properties failed to use their designated payments for insurance premiums or property taxes as promised.
The circuit court dismissed all counterclaims after finding them barred by statutes of limitations or unsupported by sufficient facts. Specifically, most claims related to losses from the uninsured fire or unfavorable loan terms accrued when the amended contract was signed in January 2015; thus they were time-barred by January 2021 given a six-year limitation period assumed by both parties.
The appellate opinion states: “We are satisfied that the Mossutos had all of the information they needed to assert their counterclaims…by the time they signed the amended land contract.” It further notes that attempts by the Mossutos to invoke tolling doctrines such as continuing violation were unpersuasive because these doctrines do not apply to civil claims like theirs.
Claims about misapplied payments under the amended contract also failed because “the Mossutos do not allege that they suffered any additional uninsured losses or any seizure of the property based upon unpaid property taxes while the amended land contract was in effect.” Applying their payments toward outstanding principal actually reduced future interest owed.
On appeal, William and Lisa Mossuto argued there were factual disputes regarding whether they were truly in default under their payment obligations. However, both courts found it undisputed that required payments had not been made since August 1, 2021—well beyond a thirty-day grace period specified in their agreement—making them eligible for strict foreclosure under Wisconsin law.
The appellate panel concluded: “There is no potential resolution…that would change the fact that the Mossutos failed to make sufficient payments.” As such, if they did not pay a redemption amount exceeding $132,000 within thirty days of judgment entry, they would be “forever barred of all right, title and interest” in the premises described in their amended land contract.
Attorneys’ names are not specified within this decision notice. The case is identified as Appeal No. 2024AP1738; Circuit Court No. 2022CV53.
Source: 2024AP1738_CRS_Properties_LLC_v_Mossuto_Opinion_Wisconsin_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
