Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Agreeing to taking title equally does not necessarily mean that the profits/revenues are to be split that way. Absent a clear agreement to the contrary, the normal division is that each side would get back what they put in and then split the remaining profits perhaps 50-50.

I disagree. There is a strong case, as a consequence of the equitable principle of "purchase-money resulting trust" that you are entitled to 70% ownership and therefore 70% of the net proceeds of sale. This is true irrespective of how title is taken or held, or in what percentages. Ownership follows down payment except where the circumstances show or imply a gift by the owner paying the larger share to the other owner. Contact me for some real-life examples and further free consultation; I've handled several such cases including one where my client's victory at trial was upheld on appeal.

I think both Mr. Shers and Mr. Whipple are jumping to conclusions that cannot be reached on the limited information you provided. The purchase money resulting trust doctrine does not simply automatically kick in every time someone puts up money for purchase of property and receives title in a different proportion from the ratio of the contributions. Just as with any partnership, a partnership in acquiring land may result in a 50/50 partnership without 50/50 cash buy-in. One party may be more of an investor, and the other may contribute know-how, or work. In fact, although Mr. Whipple may be more up on this than I am, a quick search I did turned up no case in which a purchase money resulting trust was imposed on business partners who contributed unequally to acquisition of real property. Mr. Sher's answer would be right in a community or putative community property division. I'm not sure it would apply to dissolution of an investment purchase. You may actually be entitled to a purchase money resulting trust, or to a greater share of the proceeds on other theories as well. The one thing that is good for you is that the way you took title is weak proof of intent to share in the proceeds 50/50. Joint tenancy cannot be for unequal shares. So if you wanted to take title as joint tenants you had to take 50/50 title, regardless of how the proceeds would be distributed upon sale. Other than that, it would require a review and analysis of the history and circumstances of the purchase and ownership to establish any clear conclusions as to what exactly you are entitled to out of the sale.

All of our answers are correct in certain circumstances, but Mr. McCormick is more inclusive. All three of us would agree that you need to provide more information for any attorney to be able to come up with a decision the attorney would feel comfortable with.