Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Real Property Law
Partition Action Subject To Evaluation of Equities Between Parties
Arata v. Behling
NYLJ 1/12/09, p. 32, col. 5
AppDiv, Second Dept.
(memorandum opinion)
In an action for partition of real property, the plaintiff co-tenant appealed from the Supreme Court's denial of his summary judgment motion. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the remedy of partition is subject to an evaluation of the equities between the parties.
From 1992 to 2005, the plaintiff co-tenant's father co-owned the subject property, as joint tenants, with his long-time companion, defendant Behling. On Jan. 31, 2005, the father conveyed his interest in the property to the plaintiff, reserving a life estate. Then, on July 29, 2007, the father executed a document releasing his life estate in the subject property.In September 2007, the plaintiff brought this action seeking partition and sale of the subject property. When the plaintiff sought summary judgment, the Supreme Court denied the motion, and plaintiff appealed.
In affirming, the Appellate Division started by citing RPAPL section 901, which makes a partition action available to a joint tenant or a tenant in common. But the court then went on to hold that the remedy of partition “is always subject to the equities between the parties.” In this case, the court conceded that the plaintiff had demonstrated his ownership of and right to possession of the subject property, but also held that because defendant Behling had raised issues of fact about whether the equities favored her position, The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff co-tenant's summary judgment motion.
Partition Action Subject To Evaluation of Equities Between Parties
Arata v. Behling
NYLJ 1/12/09, p. 32, col. 5
AppDiv, Second Dept.
(memorandum opinion)
In an action for partition of real property, the plaintiff co-tenant appealed from the Supreme Court's denial of his summary judgment motion. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the remedy of partition is subject to an evaluation of the equities between the parties.
From 1992 to 2005, the plaintiff co-tenant's father co-owned the subject property, as joint tenants, with his long-time companion, defendant Behling. On Jan. 31, 2005, the father conveyed his interest in the property to the plaintiff, reserving a life estate. Then, on July 29, 2007, the father executed a document releasing his life estate in the subject property.In September 2007, the plaintiff brought this action seeking partition and sale of the subject property. When the plaintiff sought summary judgment, the Supreme Court denied the motion, and plaintiff appealed.
In affirming, the Appellate Division started by citing RPAPL section 901, which makes a partition action available to a joint tenant or a tenant in common. But the court then went on to hold that the remedy of partition “is always subject to the equities between the parties.” In this case, the court conceded that the plaintiff had demonstrated his ownership of and right to possession of the subject property, but also held that because defendant Behling had raised issues of fact about whether the equities favored her position, The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff co-tenant's summary judgment motion.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.