Practice point: The Appellate Division affirmed that plaintiff, as administrator of her husband's estate, was entitled to judgment in an amount equal to his property interest and the appointed referee's award of that value.
The Appellate Division determined that the court properly considered defendant's undisputed testimony that she alone contributed all of the funds utilized to purchase and maintain the property, and that she had resided in the home since its purchase. Defendant further testified that her son, plaintiff's husband, never resided in the home and that his name was put on the deed solely for defendant's convenience.
Student note: The presumption that tenants-in-common share equally in
their common tenancy may be rebutted by facts
showing that they hold the tenancy in unequal shares. A court acting in
equity may take into account the amounts invested in the property by the
respective tenants in determining the shares to which they are
entitled.
Case: Ampratwum v. Appiah, NY Slip Op 01533 (1st Dept. 2015)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Easement by prescription and declaratory judgment.
