In Johns v. Scobie, the California Supreme Court held that each co-owner has the right to occupy the whole property, and that a co-owner’s possession is presumed to be for everyone until the others get notice it has turned hostile.
In Wood v. Henley, the California Court of Appeal held that a co-owner’s family could not take an absent owner’s half interest in Ventura County land by living on it, improving it, and paying taxes, because possession by one co-owner is possession for all.
In Swartzbaugh v. Sampson, the California Court of Appeal held that one co-owner can lease jointly owned property without the other’s consent, but the lease is valid only as to the signer’s share, and the other owner keeps her right to possession and to partition.
California Civil Code section 685 defines an interest in common, or tenancy in common: property owned by several persons, not in joint ownership or partnership. Every tenant in common can use the whole property and can partition as of right.
In Estate of Hughes, the California Court of Appeal held that a co-owner living in the house owed no rent just for living there, but his court petitions claiming 100 percent ownership were an ouster.
In Martin v. Walker, the California Supreme Court held that a co-owner who never lived on the property, and whose co-owner held all of it and denied their title, could still sue for partition. The court decides who owns what in the same case.
In Zaslow v. Kroenert, the California Supreme Court held that a co-owner who changes the locks and refuses entry commits an ouster, and the locked-out owner can recover their share of the rental value.
In Preciado v. Wilde, the California Court of Appeal held that a co-owner cannot take a relative’s share by adverse possession through exclusive use alone. Between co-owners, the bar is higher than between strangers.
Hacienda Ranch Homes v. Superior Court defines ouster as the wrongful exclusion of a co-owner and holds that paying the taxes, maintaining the land, and posting a for-sale sign did not let one co-owner take the whole property from the others.
Usually not. Living in the house does not give a co-owner control over it. In California, co-owners have equal rights to the property, and a partition action lets the other co-owner force a sale.
No. Locking out a co-owner is likely an ouster under California law and can expose you to damages. A partition action is the proper way to end the co-ownership and recover what you are owed.
Technically, yes. But in a California partition action, the court can make the renting co-owner account for the income, pay for exclusive use, and end the co-ownership.
When a relative moves into an inherited house, refuses to sell, and stops paying expenses, the other heirs are left covering the costs. A California partition action can force a sale.
California Civil Code section 843 addresses concurrent ownership, ouster, and damages. It sets how a co-owner out of possession can establish an ouster.
Yes. A California co-owner can partition a rental property even with tenants and a good lease. Here is how rent, receivers, tenants, deposits and the sale are handled.
Every partition action in California starts with a complaint for partition. Below are free partition action forms and templates, grouped by stage of the case, plus the official California court forms most partition actions use.
No. An eviction won’t remove a co-owner, because each co-owner has an equal right to possess the entire property. A partition action is the way to end the co-ownership.
A 50% owner of California real estate has the right to force a sale through a partition action, occupy the entire property, and collect 50% of the net rental proceeds, among other rights.
A partition action is a lawsuit in which a California court ends the co-ownership of real property by dividing it or ordering it sold and dividing the proceeds. A co-owner generally can force a sale without the other co-owners’ consent.
When siblings inherit a house and one moves in, the others often want them out. You can’t evict a co-owning sibling, but a partition action can force a sale.
Ouster happens when one co-owner wrongfully excludes another from property they own together, such as by changing the locks, denying the other owner’s title, or refusing them entry.
Code of Civil Procedure section 872.140 lets the court in every partition action order an accounting, contribution, and other compensatory adjustments between co-owners according to equity.
When co-owners can’t agree, a California court can force a sale. Before the proceeds are split, the court credits co-owners for mortgage payments, taxes, improvements, and rental value.
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.
