California Partition Law Blog
Generally, an owner can never legally “abandon” title to property. (Gerhard v. Stephens (1968) 442 P.2d 692, 713.) Instead, abandonment can only be found in situations dealing with personal property. Yet when the property interests in real property are in the nature of incorporeal hereditaments, the California Supreme Court has found that those interests can be abandoned.
For a person to abandon property, or a right in property, there needs to be a nonuse accompanied by unequivocal and decisive acts on the part of the nonuser clearly showing an intention to abandon. (People v. Southern Pacific Co. (1916) 158 P. 177, 180.) Accordingly, in order to find abandonment, a trier of fact must find that the owner clearly and convincingly demonstrated the necessary intent to abandon. (Gerhard v. Stephens (1968) 442 P.2d 692, 713.)
What is an Incorporeal Hereditament?
Recently, the California Supreme Court clarified that California Penal Code section 496 applies to business disputes. This is significant as Section 496 outlines penalties for someone who buys or receives stolen property, or property obtained through theft or extortion. (Penal Code § 496.) Of particular concern is 496, subdivision (c), which allows triple damages and attorneys’ fees as available remedies for someone who converts stolen property. (Id.) Over the years, there has been a longstanding debate in California on whether Penal Code section 496 applies to business disputes.
What is an Ouster (Civ. Code § 843)?
Generally, when obtaining representation for yourself and your property interests, you must make sure that your interests are indeed being protected and your wishes respected as much as legally possible. The moment it becomes clear that your attorney is not acting accordingly, it may be time to change your lawyer.
The California Partition Law begins at Code of Civil Procedure section 872.010 and ends at Code of Civil Procedure section 874.323. Section 872.250 outlines the procedure for a plaintiff seeking a partition of real property to record a lis pendens with the county office. 
Generally, every owner of property is liable for injuries on their property when it is not in a reasonably safe condition. (Cody F. v. Falletti (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 1232.) If a party was a 
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 
The California Partition Law begins at 
The California Partition Law begins at Code of Civil Procedure section 872.010 and ends at Code of Civil Procedure section 874.323. Section 872.230 outlines the necessary information a plaintiff must have in their complaint. The point of the statute is for plaintiffs to file a proper complaint with all of the content required to initiate a partition lawsuit. If the party files an improper complaint, the court could dismiss the case at the outset.
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.