In Caiozzo v. 2672 to 2674 North Beachwood Drive, LLC, the California Court of Appeal affirmed a trust’s right to partition a co-owned Los Angeles duplex and rejected the LLC’s reliance on a “fairness” defense.
In Bacon v. Wahrhaftig, the California Court of Appeal revived a Kern County oil-land partition, holding that fraud, damages and accounting claims against co-owners are part of one partition case, and that the court can decide every issue needed to do complete justice.
In Adams v. Hopkins, the California Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations never bars a partition action between co-owners. Time matters only when a co-owner has already lost title to another through adverse possession.
In Capuccio v. Caire (1922), the California Supreme Court held that co-owners who moved property into a revived company without a co-owner’s consent could not defeat her partition. The company at most stepped into their shoes as a co-owner.
In Lazzarevich v. Lazzarevich, the California Supreme Court held that a joint tenant has a right to partition unless waived, and that an unpaid judgment owed to a co-owner cannot defeat that right.
In De Roulet v. Mitchel, the California Court of Appeal held that a co-owner cannot block or delay a partition sale because the property has a profitable lease or its value is expected to rise.
In De Uprey v. De Uprey, the California Supreme Court affirmed the sale of a co-owned San Francisco lot despite five demurrers, holding that a partition complaint need not say how the property should be divided and that ownership disputes are decided inside the partition.
In Priddel v. Shankie, the California Court of Appeal held that a co-owner’s right to partition is absolute and that another co-owner’s homestead on their own share cannot stop a court-ordered sale.
If you helped with the down payment and are on title, you are a co-owner under California law. A partition action can recover your money and end your exposure when the arrangement breaks down.
Not while probate is pending. In Amundson v. Catello (2025), the Court of Appeal held that siblings who only expected to inherit property still in probate had no right to bring a partition action.
A majority owner cannot stop a partition. Even a minority co-owner in California has the right to force a sale through a partition action.
A 1976 case suggested fairness could limit partition, but the Legislature that same year made partition a matter of right unless validly waived. California courts have since rejected the fairness defense.
California Probate Code section 9823 addresses how partition actions interact with probate when a decedent leaves an undivided interest in property.
Yes. Any co-owner in California can force a partition, no matter how small their share. Even a 1% owner can file, and no majority vote is needed, because the right to partition is absolute.
Generally, no. The right to partition is absolute in California, so once filed, a partition action usually cannot be stopped, though the outcome can be shaped.
No. Under Adams v. Hopkins, the statute of limitations never bars a partition action between co-owners, unless one owner has already lost title to the other through adverse possession.
Under Code of Civil Procedure section 872.210, any co-owner can force the sale of co-owned property. The right to partition is so strong that courts call it absolute.
Code of Civil Procedure section 872.710 governs the right to partition in California, providing that partition of concurrent interests is a matter of right unless barred by a valid waiver.
Code of Civil Procedure section 872.210 decides who can file a partition action. Any co-owner of real or personal property may sue for partition, but spouses cannot use it to divide community property.
Representing co-owners statewide. Find your nearest Talkov Law office.
Practical guides from attorneys who focus exclusively on California partition actions.
The information on this site, including the Talkov Law Blog, is intended for general information purposes only. By using this site, you agree that any information contained in the site does not constitute legal, financial or any other form of professional advice. Information on this site may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, correct or up-to-date.
