California Partition Law Blog
If you’re venturing into a real estate transaction and are daunted by the contracts, you’re certainly not alone. The jargon and intricate legal parlance can often make these contracts seem more complex than they actually are. Yet, the good news is that, armed with some guidance and understanding, these contracts become much less intimidating. Our friends at Cohen and Cohen delve deeper into the realm of real estate contracts below.
Key Aspects of a Real Estate Contract
Real estate contracts can be intricate and can have significant variation based on local laws and the specific details of the transaction. Nevertheless, there are several fundamental components that most real estate contracts should encompass to be deemed valid and enforceable:
The California Partition Law begins at 
Frequently, when homeowners are dealing with financial difficulties, equity purchasers may induce homeowners to sell their homes for a fraction of the price. An “equity purchaser” is anyone who acquires title to any residence in foreclosure, with some exceptions. (Cal. Civ. Code § 1695.1(a)). The California legislature believed that homeowners were losing their homes to foreclosure due to “fraud, deception, and unfair dealing by home equity purchasers.” (Cal. Civ. Code § 1695). To combat these instances of deceit, the Legislature implemented the Home Equity Sales Contract Act, found in Title 5 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, Chapter 2.5, sections 1695.1-1695.16.
The California Partition Law begins at Code of Civil Procedure section 872.010 and ends at Code of Civil Procedure section 874.323. Section 872.220 requires that the plaintiff state the existence and location of a title report if they have procured one. A title report includes a preliminary report, guarantee, binder, or policy of title insurance. (CCP § 872.010 subd. (e).)
Generally, the seller of a home has disclosures that they are required by law to make to any prospective buyer. This also applies to the 
Oftentimes, the government will announce a public project which may affect the neighboring property’s value. Most of the time, the public project should increase the property’s value. Sometimes though, the announced public project may decrease the property’s value, which may make it difficult to rent the property. When that happens, the property owner may be able to sue for what is known as “Klopping damages”. This allows the owner to recover lost rental income due to the decrease in value from a public project.
Ejectment is an action brought by a party seeking to recover a possessory interest or claim of title in a piece of real property. Typically, an ejectment action arises when a titleholder to a piece of property has been wrongfully excluded or withheld from the property. Therefore, ejectment applies only to those cases where an individual actually has possessory title to the subject property.
Not all eminent domain proceedings involve the government taking an entire piece of property. If the property is large enough and the government’s project is limited in scope (expanding a road, for instance), then the government can instead opt for a “partial” taking of the property.
The significance of the differences between legal and equitable title is an outright confusing topic, requiring some knowledge of constructive trusts, beneficial interests, and seller’s liens. That said, the concept can be made digestible by boiling it down to its essential elements. When done, this simplification reveals how often we encounter both types of titles in common real estate transactions.
Writs of possession are special statutory remedies that usually appear in unlawful detainer actions. As their name implies, they are a means of recovering possession from someone who is wrongfully occupying a property. Writs are unique, however, in that they are almost exclusively a post-judgment tool.