Call us Today at (954) 458-8655

What Are the Defenses to a Florida Partition Lawsuit?

What Are the Defenses to a Florida Partition Lawsuit?

Get insights to the key equity defenses to a partition lawsuit, including fairness, improvements, waiver, and indivisibility of property.

When co-owners of real estate can’t agree on its management or sale, one party may file a partition lawsuit to force a resolution. These lawsuits, governed by Chapter 64 of the Florida Statutes, can result in the division or sale of the property. However, there are several equitable defenses available to protect your property rights and ensure a fair outcome.

In this article, we’ll break down:

Defenses to a Florida Partition Lawsuit

While partition is generally considered a matter of right among co-owners of property, there are several equity based arguments a property co-owner might have to defend against such a lawsuit.

The main equitable defenses against partition lawsuits involve showing that:

  • The partition would result in manifest injustice, fraud, or oppression
  • Proving that the property cannot be reasonably divided
  • Showing that the right to partition has been waived through a previous agreement or long-term conduct
  • Highlighting past contributions to the property that might affect an owner’s share of the property

All of the above defenses are fact-driven and require admissible evidence in order to prevail. Below are common equitable defenses used when defending a partition lawsuit in Florida:

Defending Against Manifest Injustice, Fraud, or Oppression

Courts in Florida have denied partition where granting it would result in manifest injustice, fraud, or oppressive results.

For example, in Condrey v. Condrey, 92 So.2d 423 (Fla. 1957), the Florida Supreme court denied partition to prevent unjust results, as forcing elderly parents from their home would have caused manifest injustice.

Generally speaking, this defense applies when:

  • A co-owner has acted deceitfully or coercively;
  • Partition would unfairly strip a vulnerable owner of their home; or
  • One party would suffer a disproportionate financial or personal hardship.

Note: This equitable defense is applied sparingly and only in extreme situations.

Waiver or Estoppel

Although partition is generally a right, that right can be waived or barred by estoppel through contracts, settlement agreements, or long-term conduct.

For example, in Haddad v. Hester, 964 So.2d 707 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), the court held that the parties had impliedly waived their right to partition because their marital settlement agreement showed a clear intent to preserve the property for the benefit of their children.

A waiver or estoppel defense may apply if:

  • A written agreement specifically prohibits partition for a reasonable period.
  • Parties behave for years in a manner inconsistent with the right to partition, such as treating the property as a long-term family residence for heirs.
  • A divorce settlement or business agreement indicates the property must be sold or held only under certain conditions.

Unequal Division Due to Improvements by One Owner

If one of the real estate owners has made significant contributions to the upkeep or habitability of a property, Florida Statutes § 64.061 notes that the courts may make adjustments during partition to account for those contributions.

For example, in Schroeder v. Lawhon, 922 So.2d 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), the court allowed an unequal distribution where one party made improvements that increased the property’s value without reimbursement from the other party.

Common Example of Partition and an Unequal Division Due to Equitable Factors

A sister and brother inherit their parents’ home in Florida. The property is owned equally, but they have different intentions for the home. The sister, who lives out of state, wants to sell the property and use the proceeds for other investments. The brother, on the other hand, has lived in the home for the past 10 years, maintaining it and making significant improvements, such as renovating the kitchen, replacing the roof, and landscaping.

When the sister files a partition lawsuit to force the sale of the property, the brother raises a defense based on his contributions to the home’s upkeep and improvements. He argues, which he can do under the statute, that his financial and labor investments should be considered when dividing the proceeds from the sale.

In this instance, the court will review the evidence provided by the brother, including receipts for materials, invoices, and before-and-after photos of the renovations. It may also hear testimony from parties who will verify the work was completed. Based on this evidence, the court can determine that the brother’s improvements added $65,000 to the home’s value.

As a result, while the property is sold and the proceeds are divided, the court may adjust the distribution to reflect the brothers’ contributions. Meaning, instead of splitting the proceeds 50/50, the court awards the brother an additional $65,000 from the sale to compensate for his improvements. The remaining balance is then divided equally between the siblings.

Agreements Limiting Partition Rights

Another defense to a partition action where the rights of the parties are limited is where there’s a formal agreement or long-term informal arrangement in place that would make it difficult to partition the property.

Examples of such agreements include business partnerships, long-term leases, or family arrangements relating to inherited property. To be enforceable, these agreements must be reasonable, time-limited, and not contrary to public policy.

Florida courts are likely to uphold these agreements, as long as enforcing them would not be unjust.

Estoppel Based on Prior Judicial Determinations

If a divorce decree, probate order, or quiet title ruling has already resolved ownership interests, that judgment may prevent a new partition lawsuit from being brought.

This defense applies when:

  • A final judgment establishes exclusive ownership.
  • A court has already divided the property or awarded possession.
  • Partition would contradict an existing judicial order.

Defective Title

In some cases, the person seeking partition doesn’t actually have a claim or an interest in the property, or the defendant can’t sell the property because of a lien or encumbrance.

Indivisibility of Property

Some properties, such as single-family homes, land with zoning restrictions, or small commercial properties, can’t be partitioned in any practical manner. That’s because they may lose significant value if divided. In such cases, courts may order a judicial sale instead of a physical partition to ensure fairness.

Under Florida Statutes § 64.061(4), if property cannot be physically divided without harming its value or unfairly prejudicing the owners, the court may order a judicial sale instead of partition “in kind.”

What Should You Do if You’re Served with a Partition Lawsuit?

Partition lawsuits can be emotionally charged, but understanding the equitable defenses can help ensure a fair resolution to the litigation. Whether it’s proving manifest injustice, improvements by one owner, enforcing a waiver, or challenging ownership, the right defense depends on the unique facts of your case.

If you’re facing a partition lawsuit in Florida, then a good piece of advice is to speak with an expert civil litigation attorney like Alan Sackrin. Alan is a Florida Bar Board Certified Civil Trial Specialist. He will take the time to answer your questions and help you evaluate your rights and protect your property interests. Call our office at (954) 458-8655 to discuss your case or book a consultation now.

Please Note: The information above is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as legal advice as each case is unique and each case should be evaluated on its own merits. The above are not the only defenses that may be asserted in a partition case. Each case is different, and each case must be evaluated based on its own merits. Therefore, we strongly recommend talking with a licensed Florida lawyer to learn your rights for your particular facts and circumstances.