[WSBARP] MSJ Possibility for Motion to Partition

Tue Feb 17 10:47:14 PST 2026

Do you remember the cite for the attorney fees rule(s)?

On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 11:23 AM Mike Zeno <mikez at zenolawfirm.com> wrote:

> Some things to think about if you proceed down the partition road:
>
>
>
>             --You want to bypass the antique referee process and list with
> a realtor.
>
>
>
>             --You probably don’t need an appraisal.  The fair market value
> of the property is whatever it sells for.
>
>
>
>             --You want opposing party to cooperate in some fashion with
> the partition process—maybe let him choose the realtor—to set up a claim
> for attorney’s fees.  The law is sort of backwards on this, though the
> authority is a bit mixed:  if you force a partition over objection you do
> not get fees.
>
>
>
> I would be happy to discuss.
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> *The Law Office of G. Michael Zeno, Jr., P.S.*
>
> T:  (425) 947-8050   F:  (425) 947-8052
>
> 135 Lake Street S., Suite 257
>
> Kirkland, WA 98033
>
>
>
> *Confidential/Privileged Communication:* This email and any attachments
> are confidential, privileged and intended only for the intended
> recipient(s).  Unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of
> this email is prohibited.  If you received this email in error, please
> notify me immediately so we can arrange for the message and documents to be
> returned and deleted. Thank you.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer:* Any tax advice provided in this
> communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be
> used, and it cannot be used, by the recipient or any other taxpayer (i) for
> the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient or
> any other taxpayer, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or recommending to
> another party a partnership or other entity, investment plan, arrangement
> or other transaction.  You should seek advice based on your particular
> circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Lynn Clare
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 12, 2026 11:15 AM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] MSJ Possibility for Motion to Partition
>
>
>
> Sorry - I have been in motion-mode for a couple weeks. 1. It is a
> complaint.  2. I don't believe there is any legal basis to remove her from
> title unilaterally - Defendant is pro se and making this up as he goes
> along.
>
>
>
> 3. My question is, do I have a counter motion for sj  as to her interest
> or selling the house - He is resisting mediation on the grounds that he
> demands to have his day in court and does not think I can "force" him to
> mediate the matter. On one hand, as he has repeatedly declined to buy out
> her share, an order to sell feels like it *could* be ordered as a matter of
> law. And I can make a fine case that the % of her share is a knowable
> number at law based on their relative contributions and a recent appraisal.
>
>
>
> I guess I'm wondering if I'm thinking about this correctly. My client
> would love for this to be over without a trial and i would like to deliver
> that for her if I could.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 11:04 AM Mike Zeno <mikez at zenolawfirm.com> wrote:
>
> Lynn, I’m not sure I understand the problem, but it’s probably because I
> don’t understand the facts.
>
>
>
> “*Motion *for partition”—is this a suit brought by your client for
> partition?  Or a motion in an unsuccessful suit to establish a CIR.
>
>
>
> How could there be any legal basis for removing her from title?
>
>
>
> Is the problem that she doesn’t want the property sold?
>
>
>
> Mike Zeno
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *The Law Office of G. Michael Zeno, Jr., P.S.*
>
> T:  (425) 947-8050   F:  (425) 947-8052
>
> 135 Lake Street S., Suite 257
>
> Kirkland, WA 98033
>
>
>
> *Confidential/Privileged Communication:* This email and any attachments
> are confidential, privileged and intended only for the intended
> recipient(s).  Unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of
> this email is prohibited.  If you received this email in error, please
> notify me immediately so we can arrange for the message and documents to be
> returned and deleted. Thank you.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer:* Any tax advice provided in this
> communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be
> used, and it cannot be used, by the recipient or any other taxpayer (i) for
> the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient or
> any other taxpayer, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or recommending to
> another party a partnership or other entity, investment plan, arrangement
> or other transaction.  You should seek advice based on your particular
> circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Lynn Clare
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 12, 2026 10:03 AM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property listserve <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] MSJ Possibility for Motion to Partition
>
>
>
> All
>
>
>
> Quick Facts: 3 year relationship. Couple buy house. She leaves. She pays
> for another year of the house expenses, but that was 2.5 years ago. NO CIR.
> She brings motion to partition. He refuses to cooperate with mediation. He
> has repeatedly claimed he cannot get enough cash to buy her out or
> refinance. He (pro se) has just brought a motion for summary judgment
> claiming basically that it's been long enough and the court should just
> REMOVE her from the title.
>
>
>
> It's clever.  Wrong, but clever. I'm not worried about my response to
> that, but do I have any possibility of a partial summary judgment in my
> client's favor?  Obviously as to "tenants in common" and also as to "she
> can partition" - but what about as to "her interest in the property
> expressed as a share %" or "this house will be sold."  ????
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Lynn Clare
>
> Clare Law Firm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20260217/a20f87bb/attachment.html>