Palm Desert Partition Lawyers

The City of Palm Desert was first settled by the Morongo Band of Mission Indians over 10,000 years ago. It wasn’t until 1942 when residential development began. Today, Palm Desert is a resort destination and boasts both affordable and high-valued homes. With 65% of owner-occupied homes, this suggests that many Palm Desert homes are jointly owned. As such, residents of Palm Desert who own real estate may face disputes with co-owners. Generally, the best Palm Desert 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

Partition actions for successive estates are allowed as long as such partition is in all of the parties’ best interest, unlike the partition of concurrent interests. (CCP § 872.710(c).)

Originally under the partition statutes, a partition of the property was not allowed unless there was a co-tenancy since the co-tenancy gave the right to partition. (see Jameson v. Hayward (1895) 106 Cal. 682.) The statute allowed a tenant in common in a remainder in fee to bring an action in partition against the other cotenants if the remainder was subject to a life estate. (see Geary v. De Espinosa (1921) 51 Cal.App. 52.) This statute was later amended to allow for a life tenant to bring a partition action for the real property subject to a life estate with remainder even where the holders of a contingent remainder interest existed and the class who would inherit the interest was not yet determined. (see Garside v. Garside (1947) 69 Cal.App.2d 318.) However, a holder of a remainder interest was not permitted to bring an action against a life tenant. (see Akagi v. Ishioka (1975) 47 Cal.App.3d 426.)

The present partition statute removes those limitations and allows for a co-owner of personal property or an owner of an estate of inheritance, an estate for life, or an estate for years in real property when the property or estate therein is owned by several persons concurrently or in successive estates to bring a partition action. (CCP § 872.210(a).) An action in partition is available to sever the parties’ interests where the property is owned by several persons as joint tenants or tenants in common. (CCP § 872.210(a)(2).)

The present partition statute does not require that a person be in possession, but only prescribes ownership of the land by several individuals in concurrent or successive estates of inheritance for life or for years. (CCP § 872.210(a)(2).) Instead, actual possession or the right of immediate possession is not required to allow a co-owner to seek an action in partition if the co-owner is a person enumerated under the partition statute. (see Young v. Hessler (1921) 72 Cal.App.2d 67.) As such, the requirement appears to extend to owners, and lessees, of property.

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