Partition (Joint Tenancy)

[KyleW]

Jurisdiction

California

Hello,

In approximately 2021, my sister and her "baby daddy" purchased a home to raise their family.

Without going into personal details, I assume you already guessed what happened next.

My sister, after having their son, turned into a homemaker, while her partner was the "bread maker". Allegedly, this agreement was a verbal one. Meaning: she stays home and he works. I only add this because it is important to the story of where we are today.

Currently, he is trying to sell the house (not an issue), but the issue my sister has with the selling of the house is she does not want his mother to be the one selling it. His mother was their agent when purchasing the house, and come to find out any fees/commissions that she earned, went to him, including anything she paid out of pocket. Again, that wasn't a biggie but now, he only wants his mother to be the one that sells that house.

She has agreed to that only IF: he pays all fees, or, they find another agent that is for lack of a better term "neutral".

Now, fast forward to earlier this month, he has started a partition case in the Superior Court and is telling her that he is going after her for his down payment on the house, and any house payment made while he has not been there.

If I read right, the only thing he is entitled to, is the sell of the house, and 50% or the profit or burden if there is no profit. Would that statement be accurate? I know in California, you may sue for almost anything, but due to the nature of their deed/title, he would be upstream without a paddle?

I would also like to add, my sister is looking into her own lawyer, but we are just trying to feel out what if anything of my sister's "assets" he would be entitled too, or what we are actually looking at regarding litigation.

 

[adjusterjack]

If I read right, the only thing he is entitled to, is the sell of the house, and 50% or the profit or burden if there is no profit. Would that statement be accurate?

No.

Here is one possibility.

Sale price less cost of sale (commission and fees) less the balance of the loan. That's the amount of equity.

He gets his down payment back. That was his initial investment in the house.

I don't think he would get his payments back because her contribution as a homemaker has value that could be quantified to offset his payments.

If he has actually filed in court (she was served a summons and complaint?) then he has pretty much eliminated his mother being involved in the sale because the court will appoint an independent unbiased third party to handle the sale which may be done by auction instead of conventionally.

my sister is looking into her own lawyer

Good.

Because any other information you get from strangers on the internet will be useless, mine as well.

 

[KyleW]

Sale price less cost of sale (commission and fees) less the balance of the loan. That's the amount of equity.

Yes that is what I meant by "profit". When everything is said and done, the money left over. Equity was a much better word.

He gets his down payment back. That was his initial investment in the house.

Does this mean that in the event there is only 50k in equity and for arguments sake he put in 100k, he has a valid argument in another civil case. Yes I know (especially in CA) you can sue for pretty much anything, but would that give him (might be the incorrect term) "standing" to go after my sister?

If he has actually filed in court (she was served a summons and complaint?)

There is a case, though she hasn't been served any papers. She got notification in the mail from a firm that seems to monitor public records soliciting representation from what I gathered from the letter.

Good.

Because any other information you get from strangers on the internet will be useless, mine as well.

I wouldn't say useless. It's more of like looking at anything that might happen. Just sort of looking for how you said about possibilities.

 

[Zigner]

Your sister is an example of one cutting off her nose to spite her face.

 

[adjusterjack]

Does this mean that in the event there is only 50k in equity and for arguments sake he put in 100k, he has a valid argument in another civil case.

The partition court will decide who gets what. There won't be a second case.

There is a case, though she hasn't been served any papers. She got notification in the mail from a firm that seems to monitor public records soliciting representation from what I gathered from the letter.

Well, did she check the court to see if the partition action was filed, and when, so she could get a copy of the complaint and find out what's coming?

would that give him (might be the incorrect term) "standing" to go after my sister?

He's already "going after" your sister.

Your sister is an example of one cutting off her nose to spite her face.

That.

By starting the fight about his mother being the realtor, she has set herself up for a significant loss of money, not only in attorney fees, but the house will be sold at auction to investors who will pay a lot less than market value.

The boyfriend is also a fool for escalating. But that's what happens when fools in love get financially involved with each other without benefit of marriage.

 

[KyleW]

By starting the fight about his mother being the realtor

She did try to get a different realtor but he wouldn't go for it. I guess it's a matter of means in which she doesn't have any unfortunately. She can't buy him out or pay for all of the fees but herself even if she wanted to.

The main thing that was concerning which I believe you hopefully answered is any potential judgement of him trying to come after for his down payment.