Union City Partition Lawyers

Union City was founded in the 1850s and later incorporated over 100 years later in 1959. Today, the town boasts its small-town feel while being situated in the center of the Bay Area. Over half of Union City’s developed land is housing, meaning over half of its land is residential. Residents of Union City who own real estate may face disputes with co-owners. Generally, the best Union City 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 general, interests of both the plaintiff and defendant may be put in issue, tried, and determined in an action for partition. (CCP § 872.610.) The parties to a complaint are essentially all actors representing their own interests. (see Grant v. Murphy (1897) 116 Cal. 427.) As such, they are all required to set forth the origin, nature, and extent of his or her respective interests in the property. (see Grant v. Murphy (1897) 116 Cal. 427.)

The parties’ interest may then be put in issue, and if so, the issues shall be tried and determined, and no partition shall be made until the parties’ respective interests have been established and settled by a trial. (see Morehout v. Higuera (1867) 32 Cal. 289. 295.) The parties may secure both legal and equitable relief in the same suit if they are entitled to both reliefs on the facts. (see Morehout v. Higuera (1867) 32 Cal. 289.) As such, all valid claims and disputes between the parties should be brought in the same action.

In a partition action, the complaint must set forth, the property description, the parties’ interests in the property, the estate as to which partition is sought, and a prayer for partition of the interests in that estate. (CCP § 872.230.) The plaintiff must also set forth the interests that he or she reasonably believes will be materially affected by the partition action even if the person’s name is unknown. (CCP § 872.230(c).) The plaintiff must set forth his or her knowledge of a defendant’s lien on the property. (see Stewart v. Abernathy (1944) 62 Cal.App.2d 429, 432.) If any person is deceased or if the plaintiff believes the person is deceased, and he or she knows no personal representative of the deceased, the plaintiff must set forth these facts in an affidavit. (CCP § 872.530(b).)

In the case where the plaintiff is seeking a sale of the property, the plaintiff must allege the facts justifying such relief in ordinary and concise language. (CCP § 872.230(e).) Where the plaintiff has a lien on the property, the plaintiff is under a statutory duty to set this forth in the complaint, including his or her interest sufficient to maintain the partition action. (Assembly Legislative Comm. Comment to CCP § 872.230.)

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