Disputed Real Property Inheritance Must Be Resolved Before Partition Action
This post was primarily authored by Daniel Zarchy, a “Rising Star” for seven of the past eight years who is a litigation attorney at Patton Sullivan Brodehl LLP.
The California Court of Appeal recently reaffirmed that a party’s ownership interest in real property must be clearly established before the party can have standing to bring an action for partition of the property.
Background
The case, Amundson v. Catello, concerned a property co-owned by Leslie Knoles and Ruth Catello. Initially, Knoles and Catello held title as joint tenants, meaning that if one of them were to pass away, their interest in the property would go to the other co-owner, not to that person’s estate. In September 2020, Knoles recorded a deed that would sever the joint tenancy and result in Knoles and Catello holding title as tenants-in-common, meaning that if one of them passed away, their 50% ownership would pass to their heirs. Knoles, who was not married and did not have children, died a few weeks later.
Trial Court – Probate and Partition
Knoles’ siblings initiated probate to distribute Knoles’ estate, including her 50% interest in the property Knoles co-owned with Catello. Catello filed a competing petition to administer Knoles’ will, and the matter was set for trial in August 2025.
While the probate proceeding was pending, Catello sued two of Knoles’ siblings in a separate lawsuit, arguing that the deed Knoles recorded in September 2020 was invalid and asking the court to declare that Catello owned the entire property. Knoles’ siblings cross-claimed, asking the court to partition the property by sale. The court issued a judgment for partition by sale, which stated that the property should be sold, with the money being split between Catello and Knoles’ estate, with Knoles’ share eventually going to her siblings.
Catello appealed, arguing that the siblings did not have standing to seek partition.
Appeal – Siblings Lack Standing
On appeal, the court noted that all parties seemed to agree there was a chance the probate trial would result in Catello being awarded sole ownership of the property. In order to seek partition, the siblings were required to show that their interest in the property was “concrete and actual, and not conjectural or hypothetical.” The relevant statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 872.210, also states that a partition action may be brought by “An owner of an estate of inheritance . . . or an estate for years in real property where such property or estate therein is owned by several persons concurrently or in successive estates.”
The siblings argued that they had standing given that they believed Knoles died without a will, and that under the Probate Code they would be Knoles’ heirs. However, the Court of Appeal held that the outcome of the probate proceedings was uncertain, and that regardless, an heir’s rights to the decedent’s property do not vest until the estate’s distribution. Until that distribution, they have no property rights, and certainly not enough to justify a partition action. As a result, the Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order granting partition.
Takeaway
If you believe you are in line to inherit real property, you must allow probate proceedings to conclude so that your title is established before you can seek to partition the property. Jumping the gun will only result in expensive and wasteful litigation that should have waited until after the estate in question was distributed.