Real Estate Law

A partition action is a lawsuit between co-owners of real property, where the plaintiff is attempting to have the Court force the sale of property which they own with another owner or owners. Partition actions are not, however, limited to obtaining the court’s Order to sell the property jointly owned. The Court has other equitable powers in a partition action including the court’s ability to conduct an accounting if there is an imbalance in who received rents on the property or an imbalance in payments made by the co-owners towards maintenance of the property.

What this means is that the Court can require an accounting to be done between the parties before deciding what to do with the proceeds from the sale of the subject property. If the Court determines that one of the owners has received more than his/her share of the rents, the Court can Order that owner to first repay the amounts he/she received in rents in excess of the other co-owners, before they can receive their percentage share from the proceeds from the sale.

Similarly, if one of the owners has paid more than their share of the costs in maintaining the property, as compared to the other owner or owners, the Court has the power to Order that the owner that has paid less than the other owner(s), reimburse the other owner(s) so the amounts that each have spent on maintaining the property are properly proportionate.

To conduct the accounting, the Court would order the property be sold and then after determining the amount of net proceeds available from the sale, would issue an Order on how those proceeds would be distributed after taking into account whether one of the owners needs to be reimbursed for their share of rents that they never received or for their overpayment for property expenses. After those funds are redistributed, the Court would then Order all of the proceeds to be proportionately distributed.

I regularly represent clients in Oakland, California and in the East Bay, California, in partition actions. If you have questions, or need representation by a California real estate attorney involving a partition action or a dispute between co-owners of real property, please feel free to contact me to arrange for a consultation at (510) 465-0025.

Sometimes the true owner of a property finds it necessary to obtain or transfer title to real property to a third party, usually somebody they trust, for a variety of reasons, the most prominent being, as a necessity to obtain financing to purchase the property.

Occasionally, the trusted person later refuses, for whatever reason, to properly return title to the property to the true owner. In this case, there are remedies available to the true owner of the property.

The true owner of the property can file a lawsuit to recover title to the property from the third party. This type of action is similar to, but slightly different from, a quiet title action. This type of action is actually an action for equitable relief, where the true owner is trying to obtain a court order declaring that all right, title, and interest in the property belongs to the plaintiff (the true owner).

If the true owner is concerned that the person holding title to the property might sell or place a lien against the property, it is important to get a lawsuit filed right away, and then the true owner can record something against the property known as a lis pendens (or notice of pendency of action), which in most instances will prevent the person holding title to the property from selling or placing a lien against the property.

I regularly represent clients in the Bay Area, California in these types of equitable actions. If you have questions, or need representation by a California real estate attorney involving a title dispute, please feel free to contact me to arrange for a consultation at (510) 465-0025.

A partition action is a lawsuit that a owner of property files against the other owners of the same property to compel the sale of the property.  To commence a partition action, the lawsuit (or complaint) is filed.  Then all owners of the properties are served with the lawsuit.

The process can end shortly after that point if the defendant obtains sound legal advise.  There are not many defenses to a partition action, particularly if the property involved contains a single structure such as a house.  With that being the case, it is in the best interests of all of the parties, plaintiff and defendants alike, to resolve the case by either selling the property or where one of the defendants buys-out the plaintiff’s interest in the property.

If the defendant is receiving good advise, an immediate opportunity to settle the case should be present.  Defendants, however, do not always get good advise and do not always make reasonable and rational decisions.  But even those cases, after some time, do get resolved with a buyout or a sale of the property.

I regularly represent plaintiffs and defendants in California partition actions in the East Bay Area.  If you believe that you would benefit from a partition action or have been named as a defendant in a partition action, please feel free to contact me to arrange for a consultation at (510) 465-0025.

Maybe. People can agree to just about anything, as long as the agreement has certain essential components, such as consideration; a writing, if it is required; and the matters agreed to cannot be illegal.

So, if there is a written agreement of ownership that is inconsistent with how title is held on the deed, that agreement may be enforced by the Court even if the deed does not reflect the true terms of the agreement.

Likewise, if the agreement is verbal or even implied based upon conduct, it too may be enforceable. There are, however, far more hurdles to overcome in that situation. The first obstacle would be the requirement under the statute of frauds that an agreement relating to or conveying real property and an agreement that takes more than a year to perform is required to be in writing. Often the statute of frauds defense, however, can be overcome by partial performance or the parties’ conduct.

The next obstacle would be the burden of proof. The holder of record title to property (that is, the title on the deed) is presumed to be the owner of both legal and full beneficial title to the property. This presumption made be rebutted only by clear and convincing proof. The clear and convincing evidence standard requires that the evidence be “so clear as to leave no substantial doubt in the mind of the trier of fact; it must be sufficiently strong to command the unhesitating assent of every reasonable mind.”

This type of lawsuit is referred to as a Marvin Action. Although these are not easy cases to win, with the right type of evidence, a Plaintiff asserting a Marvin Action can prevail. Further, these cases often settle without the necessity of having to go to trial and fully prove your case. I have represented clients in East Bay California and other parts of the Bay Area California in Marvin Actions. If you believe that you have a right to property under these types of principles or agreements, or have had a Marvin Action asserted against you, please feel free to contact me at (510) 465-0025 to arrange for a consultation to determine whether or not the evidence might support a Marvin Action.