Legal Question in Real Estate Law in Illinois
I'm in Illinois, and have been searching for something stating in black and white that I can print out which clearly states that by law my brother, sister, mother and I do NOT have to keep a property handed down to us when my father died. The property was originally my grandparents', and when they passed away, it went in equal parts to my aunt, uncle and father. Upon my dad passing, it is now owned by my aunt, uncle, mom, sister, brother and myself. Upon my aunt and uncle's deaths, they each have 3 children and a spouse their shares will ultimately go to. We have barely any contact with my father's side of the family, they want the property to remain "in the family" and have no intention of selling or buying us out, and as my aunt is in Tennessee, and my uncle is a drunk, we want OUT. What are our rights, as our lawyer said it was "cut and dry - you can't be forced to jointly own inherited property in Illinois - they either buy you out, or a judge will force the sale", but now $4,000.00 later, and our lawyer says THEY hired a lawyer who is trying to put in a "motion to dismiss". Dismiss WHAT? If the law states we can't be forced to jointly own, then why can't we all just go in front of a judge and have the judge decide and be done with it? The property is only worth about $100,000. We want out, but can't afford to keep dumping money into legal fees. What are our options?
2 Answers from Attorneys
I am not sure what is being dismissed either. There is a legal action going on, probably filed by your attorney for you, and your family wants it dismissed. Is it a partition action?
If you are still paying a mortgage on the property, stop making payments. The bank will foreclose and that will be that. If the rest of your family continue making the payments then it is theirs.
Also, don't pay your share of the taxes. That would have the same result.
"Why can't we all just go before a judge..." That is what you, through your lawyer, are trying to do. Your family is trying to block that. The fact of the matter is that you cannot go in front of a judge for free. There are filings that have to be paid for, because the judge has to have an idea of what is going on before you walk into the courtroom. No, you cannot do this in his office. Legal actions are public, in this case, for the benefit of the creditors. You do NOT want a system of "Star Chamber" legal actions. (www.wikipedia.com, 'Star Chamber')
Also, you need representation so you can't come back later and say that you did not know what was happening and won't the judge please take it back.
Ownership is an affirmative act and society presumes that you -want- to own something. It's tough when you don't want something.
Basically, the cheapest way is to go limp. Stop paying taxes, stop maintaing the property, etc. Make the municipality and your family take you to court.
As w/ Mr. Palmer's answer, it sounds like your attorney filed a partition action, which is a lawsuit to divvy up real estate when there is a stalemated dispute over ownership, occupancy, management or other property rights and obligations. A motion to dismiss tests the allegations of the complaint for partition. It can be a technical, but final decision in a case. Your attorney is obligated to tell you the other side(s) are not caving in, but it doesn't mean you don't have a good case. You need to talk to your attorney and become direct participants in your case, ask questions -- like "what do they think is wrong with the lawsuit that they want to file a motion to dismiss" and allow yourselves to be educated to the process. If you start asking outsiders like us all of your questions, you will never really know what is going on in the case. But if you are not satisfied with the way your attorney is communicating things to you in a way that you can understand, even after asking for more information, then it may be time to think of switching attorneys. You need someone you can talk to and confide in....
The response given is not intended to create, nor does it create an ongoing duty to respond to questions. The response does not form an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to be anything other than the educated opinion of the author. It should not be relied upon as legal advice. The response given is based upon the limited facts provided by the person asking the question. To the extent additional or different facts exist, the response might possibly change. Attorney is currently licensed to practice law actively only in the State of Illinois, inactively in Florida. Responses are based solely on Illinois law unless stated otherwise.