Hesperia Partition Lawyers

Originally a Spanish land grant, the city of Hesperia was founded in 1781. Hesperia was a slow growing town up until the 1980s, when the town experienced suburban growth. Today the city of Hesperia boasts a hometown essence and affordable housing. Hesperia residents who own real estate may face disputes with co-owners. Generally, the best Hesperia 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

A top Hesperia Partition Attorney will be aware of the burden of proof, presumptions and sufficiency of evidence required to justify the sale of the property, rather than division. The determination of whether an actual partition or sale is appropriate is a question of fact for the party seeking sale to prove. (see Bartlett v. Mackey (1900) 130 Cal. 181.) The party seeking sale must do so without the help or use of judicial notice or unproved facts. see Bartlett v. Mackey (1900) 130 Cal. 181.)

In the past, it was presumed that land held between the parties could be equitably divided equal to each parties’ interest in the property, allowing each party to have separate tracts. (see East Shore Co. v. Richmond Belt Ry. (1916) 172 Cal. 174.) However, in modern transactions for partition, the sale of the property is favored over the physical division as the value of each parcel when divided often does not equal the value of the whole property before division. (see Cummings v. Dessel (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 589.)

The burden of proof is on the party seeking to force the sale of property against the other parties to prove that a partition in kind of the property is not proper. (see Richmond v. Dofflemyer (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 745.) If the party is unable to prove that a sale would be more equitable in the action, then the presumption will be that a physical division is more suitable. (see Butte Creek Island Ranch v. Crim (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 360.) A court may also use information concerning the property’s character and location as evidence that a partition in kind is not preferable. (see Romanchek v. Romancheck, (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 337.) Zoning restrictions may affect the possibility or practicability of a physical division. (see Cummings v. Dessel (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 589.) The best Hesperia Partition Attorneys will be familiar with this process.

One type of evidence that can justify a partition sale of property rather than physical division is if the property is situated in a way that a physical division of the property into separate tracts of equal value is impossible. In this case, the party seeking such sale must prove that the land is not able to be divided equally. The other type of evidence is economic evidence that the physical division would substantially diminish the value of each co-owner’s interest in the property. (see Butte Creek Island Ranch v. Crim (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 360.) Another reason for a partition by sale is if the value of the property has increased due to buildings and improvements fit for a particular purpose and a physical division would diminish this value to at least certain parts of the property. (see Formosa Corp. v. Rogers (1951) 108 Cal.App.2d 397.) For example, if the property has a water well and any part of the property would be practically valueless without it, the judge will likely order a partition by sale. (see Sting v. Beckham (1949) 94 Cal.App.2d 823.) A person who intends to partition their property by sale should consult a top Hesperia Partition Lawyer to ensure that they adequately understand the process.

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