San Ramon Partition Lawyers

The city of San Ramon was formerly a village which developed once the Southern Pacific Railroad came into town in 1864. Today, the town has an estimated population of 76,000 and is known as Tree City USA. Housing units in San Ramon are over 70% owner-occupied, which suggests that many homes are jointly owned. As such, residents of San Ramon who own real estate may face disputes with co-owners. Generally, the best San Ramon 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

In a partition action, there is specific information required to be set forth in a complaint in order to permit the lawsuit to proceed. The plaintiff must set forth a property description of the disputed property. (CCP § 872.230(a).) If the property in dispute is tangible and personal in nature, the plaintiff must set forth its usual location. (CCP § 872.230(a).) If the property is real property, the plaintiff must set forth both the legal description and the street address or common designation, if any. (CCP § 872.230(a).)

The description of the property will suffice as long as it allows for the identification of the property in dispute in the partition action. The objective of such description is to prove that the property is in the court’s jurisdiction, to allow the defendant to deny the plaintiff’s title, to allow the court to make a determination relating to the mode and extent of partition, and to help ascertain the interest to be distributed. (see Broome v. Broome (1919) 179 Cal. 638.)

In Broome, the court entered a partition decree, which fixed and determined the rights of the parties. One of the parties claimed that the decree was premature, however, based on the allegation that the partial distribution of an estate was incomplete. The Court held that the decree was final and valid, because everyone with a valid interest had received notice and there was no evidence of fraud. The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment. (Broome, 179 Cal. at 640-641.)

As such, if the plaintiff describes the property as located in a certain township and county and as a specific numbered lot in a specific bloc as it is assigned on specific plat filed on a specific date in the county recorder’s office, the description shall be sufficient. (see Home Security Building & Loan Ass’n v. Western Land & Title Co. (1904) 145 Cal. 217.) The plaintiff is not required to set forth the riparian right of the parcel in the complaint since the riparian right is part and parcel of the property, incorporated in the property’s description. (see Rose v. Mesmer (1904) 142 Cal. 322.) Where the interlocutory decree has already been affirmed on appeal, an obvious mistake as to the street name, which is blatantly a mere clerical error, does not go to the merits, and where the street is adequately described otherwise to establish its identify, may be corrected at any time. (see Fallon v. Brittan (1890) 84 Cal. 511.)

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

Client Reviews
“We were in need of a real estate attorney. Eli Underwood provided excellent legal advice and services. He explained everything well and followed through with all important issues that needed attention. We found him to be reliable, courteous, patient and extremely professional. We highly recommend Mr. Underwood without any reservations.” I.S.
"I own a real estate investment company that operates across multiple states (California, Washington, Oregon, Montana, and more), whenever I run into an issue that needs legal attention, Eli is my first call. I've been working with him for years. He is an amazing attorney and I highly recommend him." Thank you for your help Sir!" T.W.
"Mr. Underwood is a fantastic Lawyer with extraordinary ethics. He responds quickly, which is rare these days, and he is very knowledgeable in his craft. It was a pleasure working with him and we will definitely use his services in the future if needed. Thank you for your help Sir!" M.O.
"Eli took our case and controlled every hurdle put before us. I one time commented to him that he must love his job because it seemed that he was always available. When talking about my case to anyone I always bring up where, I believe, the other parties Lawyer tried to take advantage of my wife and me. Eli stopped him in his tracks. On top of it being easy to work with Eli, it was a pleasure to have had him represent us. We were in good hands." E.T
"We were in need of an attorney with considerable knowledge of real estate law and the legal issues related to property ownership. Eli Underwood went above and beyond our expectations. In keeping us abreast of our suit, his communication skills were outstanding. This talent was especially demonstrated when dealing with the apposing counsel. We feel this gave us a tremendous advantage over the opposing party that resulted in us reaching a successful outcome. I would highly recommend Eli Underwood as we found him to be an exceptional attorney." P.B.
"In our need for legal services we found Eli to be well informed and on top of our case and our needs. Our's was not an ordinary case as it was a case with many facets. It was a very convoluted case. There were multiple owners involved in a property dispute where one of the owners sued the rest of the owners with a Partition Suit. Needless to say Eli was instrumental in helping us resolve our differences and gained us a profitable sale all with good end results for all. If you hire Eli Underwood you will not be disappointed!" M.A.