Partition Case Goes Forward After Trial Court Reversed
In a recent Tennessee partition case, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee reversed the trial court’s finding that the plaintiff did not have an interest in the farm, which he sought to partition by sale.
The trial court held that, even though the plaintiff was listed as a joint tenant on the deed to the property, he had no interest based on the theories of title by prescription and unjust enrichment, and based on Tenn. Code Annotated §28-2-110. This statute prevents someone from bringing an action to assert title to property if that person has not paid property taxes for more than 20 years.
Here are the key facts:
Defendants, the parents of the plaintiff (“Parents”), owned several separate tracts of farmland as joint tenants in common (also referred to as “co-tenants”) with their sons — Plaintiff and his brother.
Plaintiff sought to partition several tracts of the farmland.
The tract known as the McLemoresville Farm (the “Farm”) was the subject of the appeal.
In 1979, Parents executed a deed transferring to Plaintiff and his brother a one-fourth interest each in the Farm.
The purchase of the Farm had been financed, and Parents, Plaintiff, and his brother all signed the deed of trust securing the loan.
Only Parents signed the note for the Farm, and they paid all of the payments.
In addition to loan payments, Parents paid all property taxes and other expenses related to the Farm for nearly 30 years.
All parties agreed that Parents, Plaintiff, and Plaintiff’s brother farmed harmoniously on the Farm, and on other jointly owned tracts, for years — until Plaintiff filed the partition lawsuit.
The trial court held that Plaintiff could not partition the Farm because only Parents had an ownership interest in it. The court gave three reasons:
Tenn. Code Ann. §28-2-110 barred Plaintiff from asserting any ownership.
Parents had obtained title by prescription to all interest in the Farm.
Parents were entitled to exclusive ownership based on unjust enrichment.
The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court on all three holdings.
Tenn. Code Ann. §28-2-110 provides that no one may bring an action to claim title to land if that person has failed to pay property taxes for more than 20 years. The Court of Appeals held that the statute did not apply to Plaintiff because the Supreme Court of Tennessee has ruled the statute does not bar a lawsuit by one joint tenant against another unless the plaintiff was ousted by the other joint tenant.
Because Plaintiff and Parents had cooperatively farmed the Farm for many years, there was no ouster and, therefore, the statute did not apply.
The Court of Appeals also held that Parents had not obtained title by prescription. To do so, they would have had to prove they possessed and used the Farm to the exclusion of Plaintiff and his brother for at least 20 years.
With respect to the unjust enrichment finding, the Court of Appeals reversed it on the basis that the payments made by Parents were voluntary. Parents never sought reimbursement for over 20 years, yet continued to work the Farm with their sons.