Bakersfield Partition Lawyers

The City of Bakersfield was named after Thomas Baker, a lawyer and former colonel, who was attracted to the area during the California gold rush. In 1880, Bakersfield had a population of 801 residents. Today, Bakersfield is home to over 400,000 residents. Roughly 60% of the housing units in Bakersfield are owner-occupied which suggests that many of the homes are jointly owned. As such, residents of Bakersfield who own property may face disputes with co-owners. Generally, the best Bakersfield Partition Lawyers usually find partition action to be the best remedy for disputing co-owners in four broad categories:

• Split real estate dispute;
• Brother-Sister real estate dispute;
• Investor-Investor real estate dispute; and
• Significant other real estate dispute

Every partition action involves issues of jurisdiction, venue, and potentially consolidation. Partition actions are equitable in nature and the superior courts have jurisdiction over partition actions under Code of Civil Procedure section 872.110. (CCP § 872.110(a).)

It is important to note that a probate court's control over the property to be partitioned before the estate is distributed is not the same as the exclusive jurisdiction over such property. (see Mears v. Jeffry (1947) 80 Cal.App.2d 160.) A suit under the partition statutes or allocation of property is limited to the property interests that are subject to distribution and it does not include other interests except where the owners of other interests agree to be bound by the partition, allotment, or other division. (Prob. Code § 11950(b).)

Code of Civil Procedure section 872.110 provides the guidelines in determine which county is proper for the trial of partition actions. For the purposes of this provision, the term "real property" encompasses not only one entire tract, but also multiple different parcels. (see Murphy v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1902) 138 Cal. 69.) Where the partition action concerns real property or both real and personal property, the proper venue for trial is where the real property or some part of the real property is located. (CCP § 872.110(b)(1).) Where the partition action concerns only personal property, the proper venue for trial is where the personal property is principally located when the action is commenced or where any of the defendants reside at the time the action is commenced. (CCP § 872.110(b)(2).)

It is proper for a judge to consolidate two actions and dispose of the issues involved in a single trial if the actions brought directly or indirectly affect the right to partition. (see Bixby v. Bent (1881) 59 Cal. 522.) For example, the judge may consolidate a partition suit and try it with another action later commenced to foreclose a mortgage on the same disputed property if all the parties concur that a partition is appropriate to subordinate the mortgagee's right of foreclosure. (see Kuns v. Dias (1917) 32 Cal.App. 651.) A person intending to seek a partition of property should ensure that they adequately understand the process.

At Underwood Law Firm, our Bakersfield Partition Attorneys are well-versed in the legal remedy of partition, and are ready to discuss your legal issues.