Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Partition Sale of Real Estate

It depends on what the rest of the judgment says, you have omitted the portion that tells who is supposed to pay.

Re: Partition Sale of Real Estate

Would need more information, such as entire judgement and possibly other information.

Re: Partition Sale of Real Estate

If the partition was to both parties benefit then it is split. Call me directly at 619.222.3504.

Re: Partition Sale of Real Estate

There is quite a bit of case law interpreting 874.010. It seems to me that the usual interpretation is that attorney fees are first divided between "common benefit" fees and plaintiff-benefit fees; then the common benefit amount is apportioned the same as the owners' interests as found by the court or referee.

The same would be true of the referee's fee except that all of it would be apportionable instead of, as with attorney fees, only the common benefit portion.

So, I think there is a two-step process. First, the plaintiff's attorney fees are split between common benefit and plaintiff benefit items, then the former is added to all the other costs and apportioned. The plaintiff must pay plaintiff-benefit legal fees.

It is possible the order could be interpreted to mean the defendant pays everything, but I don't believe this is a correct interpretation, since the order itself refers to the code, which is rather clear; also, it would be an abuse of discretion for the court to order defendant to pay 100% of the plaintiff's legal fees in what is essentially a no-fault matter.

Take a look at the discussion in Finney v. Gomez (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 527, beginning at p. 545.