|
Adamson
v Hunt
S. Ct. Oregon, 1975
Author:- Sam Biers
TENANCY BY THE ENTIRETY
Relevant Facts: PL Margaret
married Brian. Then they wanted to purchased a fourplex
apartment, and put down the earnest money with Hunt(df).
Brian’s mother Inez(df) advanced the down payment of $5000
and was listed as a purchaser of the property. Seven years after
the K, Brian conveyed interest to his father. 3 mos. later
Brian and Margaret filed for divorce, with interest set aside
solely to Margaret. Divorce decree specified that the
property was awarded to Margaret.
Legal Issue(s): Whether
Brain and Margaret had one half interest as tenants by the
entirety and Inez had one half interest individually?
Court’s Holding: Yes
Procedure: Pl filed suit to
determine equitable interest in a land sale contract between
herself, and co-purchaser. Trial ct. decreed PL owned 2/3
and df owned 1/3 interest and ordered an accounting and sale of
those interests. Df appeals. Reversed in part.
Law or Rule(s): The
historical unity of husband and wife is apparent in the tendency
of courts to award each couple only a single share under a
tenancy by the entirety conveyance.
Court Rationale: The
divorce decree awarded Pl Margaret all rights and title to
interest formerly belonging to Brian. Brian and Margaret
formerly owned one half of the interest as tenants by the
entirety, and thereby Margaret then owned one half of the total
interest in the property. Df by virtue of the deed owned
the other one half of the interest to the property. The concept
of tenancy by the entirety is that the husband and wife are but
one person in the law.
Plaintiff’s Argument:
Pl and Brian were separate owners of one third each, joined with
Inez who also owned one third interest in the property.
Defendant’s Argument:
The interests taken by Margaret and Brian were taken as tenants
by the entirety and as such the most the could possess is one
half.
|
