From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - View original article
|This article needs additional citations for verification. (January 2008)|
|Part of the common law series|
|Estates in land|
|Future use control|
|Other common law areas|
A partition is a term used in the law of real property to describe an act, by a court order or otherwise, to divide up a concurrent estate into separate portions representing the proportionate interests of the tenants. Under the common law, any tenant who owns an undivided concurrent interest in land can seek such a division. In some cases, the parties agree to a specific division of the land; if they are unable to do so, the court will determine an appropriate division. A sole owner, or several owners, of a piece of land may partition its/their land by entering a Deed poll (sometimes referred to as "carving out").
There are three kinds of partition which can be awarded by court: partition in kind, partition by allotment, and partition by sale. A partition in kind is a division of the property itself among the co-owners. Partition in kind is a default method of property partition. In a partition by allotment, which is not available in all jurisdictions, the court awards full ownership of the land to a single owner or subset of owners, and orders them to pay the person or persons divested of ownership for the interest awarded. Partition by sale constitutes a forced sale of the land, followed by division of the profits thus realized among the tenants. Generally, the court is supposed to order a partition sale only if the land cannot be physically divided, although this determination often rests on whether the economic value of the divided pieces is less in the aggregate than the value of the parcel as a single piece. See Delfino v. Vealencis, 436 A.2d 27 (Conn. 1980).
A provision in a deed completely prohibiting partition will not be given effect, but courts will enforce a provision that temporarily restricts partition, as long as the restriction is reasonable.
The Ontario Partition Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.4, states:
Florida provides for partition actions by statute, which basically provides that any co-owner of real estate may seek partition. In Florida, there are basically no defenses to a partition action, other than if the parties have agreed not to partition the real estate.
-- Property divided under Rule 1560(a) shall be awarded to the parties according to their respective interests.
-- A master who is appointed by the court shall make such examinations and hold such hearings as may be necessary, giving reasonable notice thereof. The master may employ appraisers and, with the authorization of the court, such other experts as are necessary to enable the master to perform his or her duties.
—The court shall permit the shares of any two or more co-tenants to remain undivided between them if they so elect by writing filed within such time as the court or master shall direct. —Parties defendant owning a majority in value of the property may object in writing to any sale, requesting that the property be awarded to them at its valuation fixed by the court and that their interests in the same remain undivided. Upon such request the entire property shall be awarded to the parties objecting to sale, as tenants in common, subject to payment to the parties desiring partition and sale of the amounts of their respective interests based upon the valuation. The amounts due the parties shall be charged as liens upon the property, to be paid in such manner and time as the court shall direct.
Partition Example: In D’Arcy v. Buckley, 71 Bucks Co. L. Rep. 167 (1997), two persons purchased property as joint tenants with right of survivorship. The Plaintiff contributed five times more than the Defendant toward the purchase price. In a partition action, the Plaintiff sought credit for the full amount of his superior contributions. The Court held that, in the absence of fraud, the working of the deed operated to convey a one-half interest to each of the two joint tenants. The decision relies the authorities of Masgai v. Masgai, 460 Pa. 453, 333 A.2d 861 (1975) and DeLoatch v. Murphy, 369 Pa. Super. 255, 535 A.2d 146 (1987). The Plaintiff argued, to no avail, that he did not intend to make a lifetime gift to defendant.
Partition in kind is favored, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §872.810, but partition by sale is allowed if a partition by sale maximizes the market value of the subject property(s).
In many cases, a two-step process may be required: 1) a trial, during which oral and documentary evidence is heard, and either affirms or denies the right of the moving party to effect a partition of the subject property(s), and, if affirmed, results in an interlocutory judgment (sometimes called a "first interlocutory judgment"), and 2) particularly in a contested partition, an evidentiary hearing (also a trial), usually after the property(s) have been appraised by experts, and during which trial additional oral and documentary evidence is heard, the property(s) are ordered divided and awarded proportionally where possible, including cash compensation where proportional division is impractical or impossible (sometimes called a "second interlocutory judgment"). The division usually requires the employment of experts such as engineers and surveyors, and the preparation of special reports (which include conveyance deeds and easement deeds). As a final act, the court, in a hearing (not a trial), will accept the special reports and order that these be executed by a title company, which will also effectuate "recordation" of the conveyance and easement deeds (any cash compensation due any of the parties will also be effectuated within the escrow).
A party seeking a partition must file a partition lawsuit. State codes generally favor physical division (partition in-kind) of the affected property(s) over sale (partition by sale as a unit), particularly if a tenant would be displaced from his or her primary residence by a sale. If in-kind partition is feasible, the property(s) will be divided proportionally. Where small differences in such division are unavoidable, cash compensation for the difference(s) will be awarded to maintain proportionality. If the property(s) cannot be divided and allocated to give each tenant a portion without spoiling the whole, the court will order a sale. A special master (referee) is commonly appointed to execute the partition process. The referee is responsible only to the court and the referee is limited only by the court's instructions, and applicable state codes. For an in-kind partition, the referee will cause deeds to the adjusted property(s) to be prepared. Where easements are required for access, the referee will employ professionals (engineers, surveyors and other experts) as required to describe the easement(s). The conveyance deeds for the adjusted property(s) and the easement deed(s) will be recorded simultaneously. Usually, "referee's deeds" (deeds signed by the referee, in the owner's stead) will be employed.
Tenants in Common (TIC) deeds may or may not be taken in equal shares, but a Joint Tenants with Rights of Survivorship (JTWROS) deed must always be taken in equal shares unless specifically and clearly indicated otherwise in the deed language. Therefore, a partition action for those two types of deeds will vary.
When a JTWROS property is partitioned, the proceeds must be divided equally among tenants without regard to contribution to purchase price since a JTWROS deed is always taken in equal shares. So with a JTWROS, contributions to purchase price is not an issue during partition. Otherwise, the premise of a JTWROS deed would be invalid and its purpose would be defeated. On the other hand, when a TIC property is partitioned, courts may be at liberty to consider unequal contributions to purchase price and adjust the tenants' distributions accordingly.
In either partition situation, tenants may request credits for unequal contributions to expenses incurred after taking deed to the property. Such credits may cover utility and maintenance expenses, and are allocated according to shares. Credits for improvements to the property may be granted if the improvements actually increased the value of the property.