Expertise
Justia Lawyer Rating
Super Lawyers
Avvo Client's Choice
Avvo 10
Lawyers of Distinction
Million Dollar Advocates Forum

Tustin Partition Lawyers

The City of Tustin was first settled in 1769 with the Portola Expedition and used to be known as the “City of Trees.” Today, most of the town’s citrus trees have been replaced by homes, schools, shopping centers and industry. Residents of Tustin who own real estate may face disputes with co-owners. Generally, the best Tustin 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

Whether the parties in the complaint are named as plaintiffs or defendants, they are all considered actors who are representing his or her own interest. The parties have the same rights as any other party. As such, each party may arrange the nature and extent of his or her interests in the property in dispute and have them adjudged. (see Grant v. Murphy (1897) 116 Cal. 427.)

Because partition actions are equitable and all claims and interests in the property may be determined in it, any party with interest in the land subject to partition alleged to come from a set of leases, conveyances, agreements, and assignments are necessary and proper parties. (see Bacon v. Wahrhaftig (1950) 97 Cal.App.2d 599.) Codefendants are proper, if not necessary parties if the complaint sets forth that one defendant has acquired an undivided two-thirds interest in the property from the other codefendants, knowing that the plaintiff has a claim against the codefendants for money advanced on their portion of the purchase price, and judgment is rightly rendered against them for the amount of money advanced. (see Donnelly v. Wetzel (1918) 37 Cal.App.741.)

The statutory provisions governing partition require that the plaintiff join all parties the plaintiff knows, or are reasonably apparent from a property inspection, who have or claim interest in the property or estate subject to the partition action. (CCP § 872.510.) It is important that all the co-owners of the property be made parties as defendants as the purpose of the suit will fail of accomplishment for the failure to name a co-owner. Thus, it is the court’s duty to ensure that the co-owner is brought in and made a party. (see Solomon v. Redona, (1921) 52 Cal.App. 300.) The Code of Civil Procedure may also require the joinder of additional parties whom are indispensable by court order. (Legislative Comm. Comment to § CCP 872.510.)

Where there has been a void conveyance, it is unnecessary to join the person. (see Pfeiffer v. Regents of University of California (1887) 74 Cal. 156.) The plaintiff is not required to join a party as a defendant if his or her only interest in the property is that of a lessee, and the judgment from the partition action shall not affect the interests of those persons not joined. (CCP § 872.540.)

At Underwood Law Firm, our Tustin 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.