You bought a house together. Both names are on the deed. The relationship ends, one person wants to sell, and the other wants to stay.
A common question follows:
Can my ex force me to sell the house even though we were never married?
In New York, the answer is often yes.
If two unmarried people own real property together as joint tenants or tenants in common, either owner may generally ask the court to partition the property. If the property cannot realistically be divided, the court may ultimately direct that it be sold.
Being unmarried changes how the dispute is handled, however. This is generally not a divorce-style property division. Instead, the dispute is governed by the deed, the parties’ ownership rights, any enforceable agreements between them, and New York’s partition law.
Unmarried Couples Do Not Go Through Equitable Distribution
When married spouses divorce in New York, Domestic Relations Law § 236 allows the court to equitably distribute marital property.
That system applies to matrimonial actions.
If two people were never married, there is no marital estate for a divorce court to divide simply because they lived together or shared expenses.
For a house titled in both names, the starting point is instead the parties’ legal ownership of the property.
New York law recognizes several forms of co-ownership. Two unmarried owners may hold property as tenants in common or joint tenants, depending on how the deed was written.
If the relationship ends, the breakup itself does not terminate that ownership.
One person does not automatically receive the house simply because that person remains living there, paid more of the bills, or wants to keep it.
What If One Owner Wants to Sell and the Other Refuses?
That is exactly the type of dispute a partition action is designed to resolve.
RPAPL § 901 permits a joint tenant or tenant in common with the required ownership interest to bring an action seeking partition of the property.
A partition action asks the court to end the parties’ involuntary co-ownership.
The court must determine the parties’ rights and ownership interests and consider whether the property can be physically divided without causing great prejudice to the owners.
If physical division is impractical, the court can direct a sale.
For a single-family house, condominium, or similar residential property, physically dividing the structure between two former partners may not be realistic.
In Paquet v. Murphy, a 2025 Second Department decision, the court affirmed partition and sale where two parties owned a single-family home as tenants in common and physical partition would cause great prejudice.
The practical result is that one co-owner generally cannot force the other to remain tied to jointly owned property indefinitely.
Does One Owner Automatically Get Half of the Sale Proceeds?
Not necessarily.
The deed establishes the parties’ ownership interests, but the final financial result can also involve an accounting.
New York courts treat an accounting as a normal part of a partition case. The accounting may examine financial activity connected with the property during the co-ownership.
For example, disputes may arise over mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance, necessary expenses, rental income, or other contributions.
That does not mean every payment one partner made will automatically be reimbursed.
It does mean that the financial history of the property may matter before the court determines what each person ultimately receives.
This is why bank statements, mortgage records, tax bills, invoices, and communications about property expenses can become important in a partition action.
Can I Keep the House Instead of Selling It?
Possibly.
A partition lawsuit does not prevent the owners from reaching a settlement.
If one person wants to keep the property, the parties may negotiate a buyout in which that owner purchases the other’s interest.
That can often be financially preferable to continuing litigation and proceeding toward a court-ordered sale.
The parties usually need to agree on a property value, determine the amount needed to buy out the departing owner’s interest, and address any mortgage or refinancing issues.
If they cannot agree, however, one co-owner’s desire to remain in the home does not necessarily give that person the right to prevent partition.
What If Only One Person Is Named on the Deed?
That is a different situation.
A traditional partition action under RPAPL § 901 generally requires the person seeking partition to hold the property as a joint tenant or tenant in common.
If only one former partner holds title, the other person’s rights may depend on entirely different legal theories and facts.
For example, contributions toward a down payment, mortgage, renovations, or an alleged agreement concerning ownership may raise issues that go beyond a standard partition action.
Those cases should be evaluated separately rather than assuming that living together or contributing to expenses automatically created ownership.
The Bottom Line
When an unmarried couple jointly owns New York real estate, neither person necessarily has to remain a co-owner forever simply because the other refuses to sell.
If both parties hold title as joint tenants or tenants in common, either owner may generally seek partition under RPAPL Article 9.
Where the property cannot practically be divided, the dispute may ultimately result in a court-ordered sale unless the parties reach another agreement, such as a negotiated buyout.
The breakup may have ended the relationship, but it does not by itself resolve the property ownership.
For unmarried co-owners, the deed, the parties’ financial history, and the available partition remedies often determine what happens next.
Attorney Advertising. This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The application of New York partition law depends on the facts and circumstances of each matter.
Primary legal sources reviewed: RPAPL §§ 901 and 915; Domestic Relations Law § 236; EPTL § 6-2.2; Paquet v. Murphy, 242 A.D.3d 1214 (2d Dep’t 2025).