Legal Question in Real Estate Law in Arizona

Re: Title holders

Your parents need to commence an action for partition, assuming the "trailer park" and "property" you refer to is real property. Suggest that they go to a real estate attorney in their area.

Re: Title holders

Is this related to CA or AZ law?

If California, then the answer is that all titleholders will need to consent. If that is not possible, then any one of the owners can force a sale via what is known as a partition action. It can get expensive, and there are a variety of requirements in filing and proceeding to the conclusion of such an action. You are likely much better off getting it settled with your sister.

But if you cannot, you will need to locate a real estate litigator familiar with partition actions. We are litigators with extensive experience in real estate litigation, including partition actions. If/when you are ready to proceed, feel free to call or email.

Re: Title holders

All parties in title must sign a deed of conveyance in order to sell the properties. You did not say what the facts were that ocurred that put you and your sister in title with your parents.

You stated that your parents own the property but you and your sister are in title with them, which leads me to believe that your parents owned the property, and then later put the two of you in title for a particular purpose (which is usually to pass the property on to the heirs and avoid probate) but there was no intent to make a gift at the time they put you in title, and they thought they could do anything they wanted with the property during their lifetimes. There may be good legal reasons and a proper basis to restore title to your parents alone. If your parents did indeed mistakenly put the children in title, they must take action at once. Your parents should consider retaining counsel and look at the propriety of bringing a legal action to get the court to order the title be restored in their name. It would be a different story if you and your sister contributed cash to purchase one or more properties or if money was given to the parents for their support and in consideration of those payments, they put the children in title.

Much more information is require to analize the facts of this case and to advise your parents as to their rights, duties and obligations.

Re: Title holders

Here's a slightly different perspective from a California lawyer, stating California law.

Each co-owner can sell independently of the other co-owners. Such a sale would only convey such interest as that holder owns, however, e.g. a one-third interest, or whatever.

The sale could be by quitclaim; or by a grant deed properly describing the interest conveyed, so long as that wasn't more than that seller owned.

The sale itself would be valid and enforceable. It might, however, breach some kind of express or implied contract between the owners not to sell, in which case the seller might be liable for damages for breach of contract.

Another effect of such a sale would be, presumably, to introduce a stranger to title. Since all co-owners have the right of simultaneous possession, the non-selling owners would acquire a new and probably unwanted "roommate."

Finally, since buyers don't want to share ownership with strangers (e.g., the "roommate" problem mentioned, it would be hard or impossible to find someone willing to buy a fractional interest in a single-family property.

So, although legally possible, a sale of a part interest is impractical under most real-world scenarios.