Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: don't do business w/family

You would be entitled to compensation for 1/2 of the repairs and improvements he did not pay because as a joint owner of the property he has a joint duty to pay the expenses associated with the property. He cannot make you do all the work and pay all the expenses and then walk away with a winfall he did not earn.

Re: don't do business w/family

It does sound, based only on your words, that you three hold the property in joint tenancy, ie., equally, 1/3 each. Cannot tell for sure without review of all initial and followup paperwork. However, many things can come in to play that can swing some if not much of the money, upon sale/partition, to those that have put the blood, sweat and tears into it. Call to discuss. Need to hear and see much more to really help and answer more questions. Don

Re: don't do business w/family

Well, to start with, whether the deed is a grant deed, a quitclaim deed, a trustee's or sheriff's deed or whatever, doesn't determine whether percentages of ownership will be shown.

Percentages of ownership should be shown whenever the deed, of whatever kind, shows that two or more grantees are taking title as tenants in common. For example, "X grants Blackacre to Y and Z as tenants in common, a 27% interest to Y and a 73% interest to Z."

Failure of the deed to say what percentage the grantees are getting leads to an assumption that they take in equal shares -- two grantees, they'll be 50-50; five grantees, 20% each, etc.

The percentages shown on the deed (or inferred from the deed's silence) can be rebutted in court by clear and convincing evidence that it's wrong (not what the parties intended).

If, however, the property is taken as joint tenants, the ownership is always equal. This is automatic. So, the only question here would be whether the grant made the marital community a joint tenant and the single man the other joint tenant (unlikely), or whether there are three joint tenants - husband, wife, and single man (more likely).

If, as I think, there are three joint tenants, each has exactly a 33-1/3% legal ownership.

When co-owners disagree, any one of them can sue for "partition" of the property. This will amount to a court-ordered sale and distribution of the net proceeds FAIRLY - it could be 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3, but if you can prove that you're entitled to reimbursement, compensation, sharing of rents earned, or anything of this kind, the court should make an appropriate adjustment in the distribution of the net sale proceeds.

Another possibility is that if this was a true partnership, you might be able to show that the property belonged to the partnership, and not to the three individuals as joint tenants, despite the deed. I doubt this would be helpful.

I specialize in straightening out situations like this (many settle before trial) and would be pleased to consult with you in greater detail.